Atheists on the march in America

Atheists on the march in America

There are 70631 comments on the TurkishPress.com story from Aug 26, 2009, titled Atheists on the march in America. In it, TurkishPress.com reports that:

When South Florida atheists held their first meeting, they were just five friends, having a beer at a bar.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TurkishPress.com.

“No Bishop,No King,No Nobility”

Since: May 08

The Underworld

#2343 Sep 8, 2009
john wrote:
Your analogy suggests to me you may be reasonable on this so I will acquiesce and assume we agree on the definition of indoctrination. Yes, I would be with you.
Thank you.

Good, then it's settled. There is no need to argue further, because we're not going to agree on anything else. Though if you're interested in
john wrote:
I'm not nearly as unreasonable as most here think I just don't feel the need to defend Christianity in such a micro way when there has been no position to defend by those that think debate can take place in such circumstances.
I'm sorry John, but sometimes you write up a paragraph that just makes no sense at all. This is one of them.

I'm going to guess based on your past posts that you are attempting to blast atheists for not having belief again by saying we have nothing to defend. That is exactly what we have to defend. Our nothing.

It is our very right to have nothing. To be at peace with that. To sit quietly at home with that.

John, I don't tell people I'm an atheist anymore, because it turns into a BORING 3 hour "conversation" I DON'T want to have... I just play along with their beliefs and whatever the conversation is passes in 3 minutes.

That is what I have to defend John. My 3 hours. I want all of those 3 hours back.

I will not come into your house to preach the ills of YHVH. I would appreciate if you and yours do not come into mine preaching 'his' praises.

That is all there is to this John. We are simply fighting for our right to believe nothing, and the fact that you're baffled by it is quite unsettling... It's called freedom John.
john wrote:
This forum is riddled with presuppositions and nonsense as to what the God of Abraham means.
It means different things to different people, but that's one of the many things we don't understand.

You've got books. You all claim the same books, but each one of ya picks out different books and says "this is just an analogy" and others to say "this is the real deal" and you can't even agree on what this god is all about.

However, when we take the books at face value... if we do that... there is a clear picture, and it's not a good one.

We have to do a lot of carving to take a decent god out it.
john wrote:
That's why I choose to put the question of a creator into more macro terms and suggest that accepting any and all possibility including alien seeding is intellectually dishonest.
That's called having two different arguments John.

If we could all agree that YHVH is a bastard we could move on and try to come up with a better god thats a more realistic fit for a disorderly and chaotic universe.

How about mad scientist god? He doesn't know everything, and he's not all powerful. He had the power to start the big bang and manage a few brief communications with us, and now he's probably dead because it's been thousands of years since we last heard from him... either that or he has a new project...(Universe 2.3) He's not going to send us to hell if we don't believe, because there is no hell, and he doesn't have that kind of power...
john wrote:
I believe that is limiting even if true and we hardly know that if we have any curiousity nto a possible purpose etc. For our lives.
But choosing a god is the most limiting thing of all.

Without choosing a religion you're free to explore the realm of existentialism without restraint...

It's a bold new world out there without the chains that bind you.

What is the world? What are we? What is reality?

You can't claim to have the answers and still be seeking them.

I'm quite positive your average atheist has explored far more concepts of god and reality than your average theist...

“No Bishop,No King,No Nobility”

Since: May 08

The Underworld

#2344 Sep 8, 2009
john wrote:
Your presuppositions are patently false and tells me you don't undertand Christianity except on a superficial level that may explain your dismissiveness.
I could say the same about your view of the rest of humanity; the non-religious in particular.

We are social creatures. We are, I believe, essentially good natured.

“Mystical Atheism for everyone!”

Since: Nov 08

El Cerrito California

#2345 Sep 8, 2009
john wrote:
"That's why I choose to put the question of a creator into more macro terms and suggest that accepting any and all possibility including alien seeding is intellectually dishonest."

"The essence of any religion lies solely in the answer to the question: why do I exist, and what is my relationship to the infinite universe that surrounds me?... It is impossible for there to be a person with no religion (i.e. without any kind of relationship to the world) as it is for there to be a person without a heart. He may not know that he has a religion, just as a person may not know that he has a heart, but it is no more possible for a person to exist without a religion than without a heart." (Leo Tolstoy, 1879)

the root word "theism" has many prefixes. Here is one that is new to me that I stumbled on: Dystheism is a form of theism which holds that God is malevolent as a consequence of the problem of evil. Dystheistic speculation is common in theology, but there is no known church of practicing dystheists. Are there any Dystheists out there ? Could a person be an atheist and a dystheist at the same time or would the two cancel each other out like matter and antimatter thus proving Leo Tolstoy's statement to be wrong ?:) Another possibility would be someone who claims to be an atheist but in reality is a dystheist that is afraid of consciously facing their religion :)

And of course there is the Atheist with a wicked sense of humor who pretends to be a dystheist just to drive the theists up the wall !:)

There is of course a another variation that would
explain people like John. A person who consciously professes to be a theist but subconsciously is a dystheist and the horrible inner conflict drives the person to seek out atheist threads in the hope of being talked out of their insanity :)

Isn't language wonderful ? Was Laurie Anderson on to something when she sang the song "Language is a Virus" ?

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#2346 Sep 8, 2009
melevy wrote:
<quoted text>Are you kidding? The christians would try to find some reason why the teacher should be fired. That's why they try to stack school boards with their kind.
My pet peeve is double standards. I don't see why christians think it is there way or the highway. So hypocritical.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#2347 Sep 8, 2009
TomSawyer65 wrote:
<quoted text>
If the teacher is muslim or jewish or jehovah witness would parents want their children taught those religions? Not everyone fits into a neatly christian package, anymore. Talking about getting religion out of schools in a NY minute :-)
melevy wrote:
<quoted text>Are you kidding? The christians would try to find some reason why the teacher should be fired. That's why they try to stack school boards with their kind.
School prayer backfire:
http://snipurl.com/qnxna
http://snipurl.com/qnxi2

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#2348 Sep 8, 2009
jack13 wrote:
<quoted text>
I doubt that any thinking human could ever kill babies, but the bible shows the true side of christianity. Their god regualarly advocates the mass killing of infants. Also the lack of medical care in America for infants has resulted in America having the fouth worst in the 30 nation industrialized countries of survival rates for infants under one year. Only Mexico, Turkey and Slovakia. Isn't it amazing how christians go on about abortion and contraception, but once the child is born, fight any effort to provide funds for the infants surival.[http://www.el paso times.com/newsupdated/ci_13245285 ] And how about the, Just Say Know program that was supposed to prevent teen pregnacies? "The rate of teen pregnacies is three times the OECD average, with only Mexico recording a higher rate among OECD countries, the report said." All the result of christian influence on the U. S. Governmet.
If churches started paying taxes the U.S. could have universal health care.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#2349 Sep 8, 2009
It aint necessarily so wrote:
RELIGION IN SPACE? NASA SHUTTLE DISCOVERY PROMOTING CHRISTIANITY http://tinyurl.com/nuturg
Religion in space? Atheists are upset that NASA's space shuttle Discovery is promoting Christianity. A sentimental Christian memento is cargo on the latest space shuttle flight.
Dr. Ed Buckner, President of American Atheists, made the following statement:“This is an inappropriate and unconstitutional use of resources. NASA is a scientific and exploratory agency that is funded by taxpayers. Its mission should not include religious grandstanding, or efforts to use outer space as a pulpit for religion.”
The atheists are right, of course. NASA, and official representatives of NASA, have no business promoting religion.
Space should be a religion-free zone. Isn't that why Melchezedek built an alter to God on Mt. Zion? Because it was one of the few places that had not been polluted with child sacrifice. Let's make space unpolluted with the primitive cult of blood atonement (Christianity).

“Is that necessary?”

Since: Feb 09

Where I was born

#2350 Sep 8, 2009
falasha wrote:
<quoted text>
If churches started paying taxes the U.S. could have universal health care.
HEAR! HEAR!! But getting that to happen will be as challenging as nailing jell-o to a tree.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#2351 Sep 8, 2009
Charlie wrote:
<quoted text>I understand. As a LEGAL DOCUMENT, if the US were to have been established as a Christian nation, this would have been clearly stated. As a LOGICAL PROPOSITION, however, it would be the case of the ambiguous middle. To not say something does not imply its contrary is true. To NOT clearly state that the US is a Christian nation does not imply that it is a NOT a Christian nation....
Actually, even forgetting for a moment about the First Amendment, there is Article VI, section 3 of the Constitution which states:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

The "no religious test clause" is an unambiguous (very clear) statement of intent to keep religion out of our government.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#2353 Sep 8, 2009
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
School prayer backfire:
http://snipurl.com/qnxna
http://snipurl.com/qnxi2
Funny :-) Thanks for sharing!

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#2354 Sep 8, 2009
keltec 9mm wrote:
<quoted text>
As I recall it was your side that brought up the Treaty of Tripoli so resorting to "theocracy" paranoia is a cop out.
No it's not.

March 4, 1789 - secular U.S. government established. 1797 Treaty of Tripoli endorsed our secular foundation.

1870 - Christmas was declared a federal holiday by Congress.

1881 - Chester A. Arthur swearing in ceremony is the first documented response of "so help me god" (not a part of the official oath of office).

1953 - "god" was added to the pledge.

1957 - "god" was added as our national motto and officially put on our money.
Bill Smith

Charleston, SC

#2355 Sep 8, 2009
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No it's not.
March 4, 1789 - secular U.S. government established. 1797 Treaty of Tripoli endorsed our secular foundation.
Wrong.

The Articles of Confederation

Agreed to by Congress November 15, 1777; ratified and in force, March 1, 1781.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#2356 Sep 8, 2009
Bill Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
The Articles of Confederation
Agreed to by Congress November 15, 1777; ratified and in force, March 1, 1781.
"Once the Congress of the Confederation received word of New Hampshire's ratification, it set a timetable for the start of operations under the Constitution, and on March 4, 1789, the government under the Constitution began operations." (" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Co... ;)

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#2357 Sep 8, 2009
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, even forgetting for a moment about the First Amendment, there is Article VI, section 3 of the Constitution which states:
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
The "no religious test clause" is an unambiguous (very clear) statement of intent to keep religion out of our government.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that to the theists, that's just not so. Nothing is the way that they don't want it to be. Nothing. Ever. Nothing. Choose one of the following:

[1] The people who wrote that didn't read it.

[2] The people who wrote that didn't understand it.

[3] The people who wrote that were just appeasing Muslims.

[4] There was something written once by somebody that negates that.

[5] Just because it doesn't say that America is a theocracy doesn't mean that it's not.

I'll have to consult my Conservative Revisionist Nutjob files and see which it is.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#2358 Sep 8, 2009
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No it's not.
March 4, 1789 - secular U.S. government established. 1797 Treaty of Tripoli endorsed our secular foundation.
1870 - Christmas was declared a federal holiday by Congress.
1881 - Chester A. Arthur swearing in ceremony is the first documented response of "so help me god" (not a part of the official oath of office).
1953 - "god" was added to the pledge.
1957 - "god" was added as our national motto and officially put on our money.
Good post, and a welcome addition to my files. I've expanded it a bit, if you don't mind.

1692 - Christian theocracy burns witches at the stake for heresy.

March 4, 1789 - secular U.S. government established. 1797 Treaty of Tripoli endorsed our secular foundation.

1870 - Christmas was declared a federal holiday by Congress.

1881 - Chester A. Arthur swearing in ceremony is the first documented response of "so help me god" (not a part of the official oath of office).

1953 - "god" was added to the pledge.

1957 - "god" was added as our national motto and officially put on our money.2001 - White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI) established.

20xx - Burning at the stake returns to America
Bill Smith

Charleston, SC

#2359 Sep 8, 2009
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
"Once the Congress of the Confederation received word of New Hampshire's ratification, it set a timetable for the start of operations under the Constitution, and on March 4, 1789, the government under the Constitution began operations." (" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Co... ;)
The "founders" were supposed to meet to add amendments to the AoC. Instead, the scraped it and wrote the Constitution illegally.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#2360 Sep 8, 2009
The Heathen wrote:
<quoted text>
HEAR! HEAR!! But getting that to happen will be as challenging as nailing jell-o to a tree.
Freeze it first.
Charlie

Papeete, French Polynesia

#2361 Sep 8, 2009
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL. But you have a purpose because you have swallowed an obvious lie / myth.
What could be a more purposeless existence than one that defined its purpose according to a fairy tale?
There is neither established fact nor consensus that God is a fairy tale……your mere opinion. You, too, might be mistaking your illusions for reality. Ever think of that? That you are a "true believer" after your own fashion?
Still stumping from Tahiti for the return of the Republicans to America?
Why don't you just shoot Lady Liberty in the face and get it over with.
Are you still stumping for the democrats?

Somehow I find dishonesty easier to stomach than hypocrisy, thus, if I had to choose the lesser of two evils, I would choose the Republicans over the Democrats.

Actually, I choose neither and have never participated in American politics, having been away from the States so long. I find Ron Paul, however, the least evil of all.
Charlie

Papeete, French Polynesia

#2362 Sep 8, 2009
Grandpasmurf952 wrote:
When my son was about 11 or 12 he had a friend from a good christian family. They invited him to go to church with them. He asked the preacher a question.
He was never invited back. Here is the question:
"IF God can do anything, can he create a rock so big that even he can not lift it?"
This is a common question that points out the absurdity of Theology. IF those theists on this sub can not answer a simple question posed by an innocent child concerning a god, why are there so many goofy leading questions directed at atheists ?
Answer to the question: Yes and no!
Charlie

Papeete, French Polynesia

#2363 Sep 8, 2009
melevy wrote:
<quoted text>You're still missing the point, but what's the use of trying to explain.<quoted text>There is really nothing for us to discuss, Charlie, we are at opposite end of the spectrum. I find non-belief in your pixie to be the most logical, credible position. There is no point to life other than what you make of it. Anything else is just superstition. Everything in my being and in my experience argues FOR that notion.
But your non-belief in pixies, by which you mean God, of course, does not come from a spirit of logic or rationality, but from your own emotional issues. You, like all atheists, attempt to shore up or rationalize your emotionally-laden stance by using logic and rationality as your crutch, because your belief is not supported by reality and history.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 8 min Amused 20,275
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 11 min ChristineM 45,559
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 31 min Flirts730 21,400
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 1 hr ChristineM 10,343
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 1 hr ChristineM 548
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 3 hr Paul WV-Uncle Sam 325
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 hr Joe Fortuna 257,132
More from around the web