Atheists on the march in America

There are 70657 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.

“Researching”

Since: Jun 08

-

#296 Sep 1, 2009
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying that you have studied and discounted the thousands of religions and gods that have come before and after your brand of sky daddy worship? Won't your face be red when you are standing before Mithras or Zues.
And while your at it why don't you define your god for us? what attributes does he hold? What Does he look like? What natural laws does he bypass to keep from being discovered?
I assure you, I and most atheists, punctuate the word god correctly. When and if you and your ilk could ever come to a consensus of exactly what god is, it may deserve correcting. Is it a noun? An adverb? Pronoun?
So what you're saying is this:
http://search.yahoo.com/search...
http://www.atheists.org/
http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news...
http://www.fox41.com/global/story.asp...
kung-fu

Worcester, MA

#297 Sep 1, 2009
If we tell you it will ruin the suprize.

“Researching”

Since: Jun 08

-

#298 Sep 1, 2009
melevy wrote:
<quoted text>No, we're not lost, you are. I intentionally spell "god" in lower case with quotes to show my disrespect for your religion.
We're not offended by your direspect to our religion.
Now if I said anything to offend you it was purely intentional.
We can hardly care less because we, unlike you, can respect your terms to believe in something like this.
It's just that when you die, and see what we were telling you then who's fault is it?
Your's.
melevy wrote:
No, because we're not interested in what you're pushing. You're wasting your time and ours. If you think you have any chance whatsoever converting any of the atheists here, you're in for one hell of an eye-opening.
We're not here to convert you confused idiots.
We're here to tell you what we read from a Holy book.
It's you who should judge to follow our words, or live in your dark ages of confusion.
You idiots do deserve to stay as Atheists because we know you and a handful of others will burn in the lake of fire, and when you do, we will look down at you and shake our heads while saying "Tssk, tssk, tssk. They should have listened, but now God has given them too many chances.".

“Jesus who?”

Since: Feb 08

Conroe, TX

#299 Sep 1, 2009
john wrote:
Ok, that is reasonable. Perhaps I'm being unfair because of other threads. There is a difference between atheism and antitheism that usually ends up with attacks from one side or another. In a debate each party needs a position to defend . I can do a pretty good job of questioning science if all I have to do is throw out what ifs and theories that were once axiomatic that are no longer. So, if this isn't the case- wonderful. I doubt it though. I didn't think asking for a position was such a difficult task to fulfill.
<quoted text>
That's why they are called theories, not laws. A theory can be proven on a limited basis, open for a new theory or law that does a better job of explaining why something is what it is. Due to evolution (blasphemy, I know) we have adapted to our surroundings and learned about our world. Science has nothing to do with atheism, but they do share common goals of discovering and defending the truth. We're smart enough to now know that the earth is not flat and the universe does not revolve around the sun. Although that was once a universal belief (theory.) Our knowledge of the universe has grown as well. So hanging on to the belief that this immense, possibly infinite collection of matter, space, and time was created in seven days by an omnipotent being is ridiculous. Faith is only acceptabe to those who cannot accept reality and think for themselves. Those who's lack of will is dissolving are moving backwards on the evolutionary scale.
We (atheists) do not accept a fabricated reality, or one explained by a collection of writings compiled thousands of years ago. We know that theories presented today may become obsolete tomorrow, but they are the best explanation that is available for the time being. Why stick with old and disproven stories and fairy tales when science advanced past that point many ages back. We are solely responsible for our own actions and control our own lives. We do not need to accredit or blame anyone but ourselves.
Outsourced

Las Vegas, NV

#300 Sep 1, 2009
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Science offers questions that may never be answered and makes you fly into outer space.
Religion offers answers that may never be questioned and makes you fly into buildings.
Jesus Christ, you hit the nail on the head!

“Science, not faith.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#301 Sep 1, 2009
UNW I am Duc De Puce wrote:
<quoted text>We're not offended by your direspect to our religion.
you seem to be fond of correcting spelling errors, it's spelled DISRESPECT, hypocrite moron. And you and your pointless beliefs don't matter enough to me to care if you're offended.
Now if I said anything to offend you it was purely intentional.
We can hardly care less because we, unlike you, can respect your terms to believe in something like this.
When you can write a sentence that is coherent, get back to me.
It's just that when you die, and see what we were telling you then who's fault is it?
Your's.
I figured that empty threat would surface at some point. I'm not in the least bit concerned.
We're not here to convert you confused idiots.
Good, because you have to chance of doing so.
We're here to tell you what we read from a Holy book.
It's incredibly arrogant of you (no surprise there) to think I give half a rat's ass about your holey (spelling intentional) book.
It's you who should judge to follow our words, or live in your dark ages of confusion.
I don't need you to tell me what to do. Your words are meaningless, as are your empty threats.
You idiots do deserve to stay as Atheists because we know you and a handful of others will burn in the lake of fire, and when you do, we will look down at you and shake our heads while saying "Tssk, tssk, tssk. They should have listened, but now God has given them too many chances.".
Yea, yea, heard it before and I still don't believe it.

“Jesus who?”

Since: Feb 08

Conroe, TX

#302 Sep 1, 2009
UNW I am Duc De Puce wrote:
Wow! You can do your own research and type into a search engine! Congratulations! You have advanced one rung on the ladder of logical thinking (evolution in action!) You've still got a long way to go to catch up with us atheists!

“Jesus who?”

Since: Feb 08

Conroe, TX

#303 Sep 1, 2009
UNW I am Duc De Puce wrote:
<quoted text>
We can hardly care less because we, unlike you, can respect your terms to believe in something like this.
Like what?? Who said we believe anything that has to do with god or religion. Don't say we have a lack of belief, because we cannot express a lack of belief if what we are supposed to be believeing is not believeable. You follow me or did i lose ya??
laughingiris

Ann Arbor, MI

#304 Sep 1, 2009
melevy wrote:
<quoted text>you seem to be fond of correcting spelling errors, it's spelled DISRESPECT, hypocrite moron. And you and your pointless beliefs don't matter enough to me to care if you're offended.<quoted text>When you can write a sentence that is coherent, get back to me.<quoted text>I figured that empty threat would surface at some point. I'm not in the least bit concerned.<quoted text>Good, because you have to chance of doing so.<quoted text>It's incredibly arrogant of you (no surprise there) to think I give half a rat's ass about your holey (spelling intentional) book.<quoted text>I don't need you to tell me what to do. Your words are meaningless, as are your empty threats.<quoted text>Yea, yea, heard it before and I still don't believe it.
Melevy,
I've read the article regarding this thread. I read the first page of posters. Then I flipped to the last post...hence, here I am.
I was raised Catholic (indoctrined since conception). In my 20's didn't have much faith in anything. In my 30's began to seek out a meaning for the way things were/are. Became Born Again Christian. I've since backslid in my 40's...yeah, things didn't work out quite so well...(wry grin). Yet, throughout I hold a firm belief that there is a higher power that directs events. Would I shove my beliefs down your throat? An emphatic NO! You go on believing or whatever it is you conscribe too.
It should be a case of "I want what you have" in order to show people the depths of their religion/beliefs.
Charlie

Papeete, French Polynesia

#305 Sep 1, 2009
centereach ny wrote:
<quoted text>
atheism is nothing more than a disbelief in god(s)
you are atributing more to it than it is. though many atheist believe in science and rationality and even skepticism i myself would ask you what you mean by atheism being the evil twin of faith.
You offer the dictionary definition of atheism, but in real life atheism is much more to atheists than that. It is an entire system of rationalization that borrows from many other systems of philosophy to support its central thesis. It relies on naturalism, Darwinism and science to explain the origins of the universe and life; on empathy or enlightened self-interest to establish a moral system; on secular humanism for its politics.

Atheism in the West has been mainly a reaction against Christianity and its worldview, to which so many of the atheist participants on this thread can attest. Thus, atheists have been forced to provide a competing worldview ad hoc that might counter the arguments put forth by Christians and comfort them in the path they have chosen.

My use of the "evil twin" metaphor was just my way of having fun opposing the antonymic nature of faith and doubt, and that in the real world both religion and the philosophy that has grown around atheism share the same characteristic of both having articles of faith.

Atheists simply do not disbelieve in the existence of God or gods the way I disbelieve in the existence of the Easter bunny, for example. Their reaction is much too visceral and passionate that anyone could believe that. If this were true, this thread would not go on as long as it has.

“Science, not faith.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#306 Sep 1, 2009
Oops... meant to say "Good, because you have no chance of doing so." in post 301

“Science, not faith.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#307 Sep 1, 2009
Outsourced wrote:
<quoted text> Jesus Christ, you hit the nail on the head!
But don't miss or you'll hit your hand!

“Science, not faith.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#308 Sep 1, 2009
laughingiris wrote:
<quoted text>
Melevy,
I've read the article regarding this thread. I read the first page of posters. Then I flipped to the last post...hence, here I am.
I was raised Catholic (indoctrined since conception). In my 20's didn't have much faith in anything. In my 30's began to seek out a meaning for the way things were/are. Became Born Again Christian. I've since backslid in my 40's...yeah, things didn't work out quite so well...(wry grin). Yet, throughout I hold a firm belief that there is a higher power that directs events. Would I shove my beliefs down your throat? An emphatic NO! You go on believing or whatever it is you conscribe too.
It should be a case of "I want what you have" in order to show people the depths of their religion/beliefs.
Agreed. And if you had read more of the posts, you'd see that atheists are not trying to change anyone's mind. However, neither are we going to idly stand by while some believers repeat the "lake of fire" threat for the umpteenth time. Also, we will defend against those same believers attempting to change secular law (which affects everyone) so that it suits them. I don't know how old you are, but I've been around long enough to remember the "blue laws." Most where I live have been repealed, but there are many believers who are working to get them reinstated, and to a greater degree than before.

“Science, not faith.”

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#309 Sep 1, 2009
Charlie wrote:
<quoted text>
You offer the dictionary definition of atheism, but in real life atheism is much more to atheists than that. It is an entire system of rationalization that borrows from many other systems of philosophy to support its central thesis. It relies on naturalism, Darwinism and science to explain the origins of the universe and life; on empathy or enlightened self-interest to establish a moral system; on secular humanism for its politics.
Not being an atheist, you don't have a leg to stand on when defining atheism. Since I am an atheist, I'll tell you what it means to me: it means that I do not believe in a "god" or higher power. That's it. Period. It has nothing to do with evolution or Darwin or science or any of the other things you ignorantly included.

Since: Aug 08

Somewhere in Ireland

#310 Sep 1, 2009
Coolmind wrote:
Religions are left overs of ancient myths and superstitions.
Leprechauns, fairies, trolls, gods, sprites, etc are all mythical and pretend.
It's the 21st century ... time to stop living in mythical times
How dare you deny leprechauns and fairies. A leprechaun lives at the bottom of my garden, and each day I can hear him tapping away on his last as he makes little shoes for the fairies in the forest! He delivers those shoes himself in a cart pulled by a miniature unicorn. The unicorn does crap a lot in my garden, but I use it to feed the roses. Don't mock what you don't understand Coolmind. There is evidence everywhere for the existence of leprechauns and fairies and indeed, unicorns. Just because you can't see them doesn't mean they don't exist. It only takes faith. Have faith, and then you can believe whatever nonsense you like!
john

Saint Louis, MO

#312 Sep 1, 2009
Unfortunately, many atheists are antitheists. Foreshadowing where this thread will end up I'll ask a simple question. What position are defending? Disbelief is not belief, and mocking religion/God is usually the response to a simple question. Stump an antitheist! Ask him what he believes. Post #7 Thanks nothing puppets.
John

Saint Louis, MO

#313 Sep 1, 2009
OK. I see no evidence for God and will just wait on the fence. Please donít try to knock me off of it. Iím not interested in theism, and would consider such an effort unwelcome. If you are right, I choose hell.
Iíll make a deal with you: if you wonít try to sell religion, I wonít criticize it or try to sell secularism.
After all, when the topic is religion, then weíre in your forum, and when the topic is atheism, I consider it our space, where I come to meet and commune with like-minded people. I wouldnít go into your church and preach atheism, and I would hope that you wouldnít come to a thread about atheists to argue with us. We donít solicit theistsí presence here, although they are welcome if they care to read what we write or ask questions for information rather than proselytizing in the form of a question, like the lady who asks three times if the earthís position in the solar system and Milky War are by chance. Those are rhetorical questions to which she already has her answers, not requests for information.
Iím here to discuss my philosophy with like-minded people, not to argue it with others, and prefer not debating it theists. That doesnít mean that when a theist asserts a contradictory position that I will just ignore it, only that I prefer having nothing needing responding to.
<quoted text>
Noted.
<quoted text>
Not in my experience, and not by me.
<quoted text>
Noted.
<quoted text>
Deal. I wonít if you wonít.
Donít try to stump an atheist and youíll get no snark. Thereís none here now, although I can feel

Those last two quotes actually aren't me they were inserted with my response and the original posters quotes were deleted. Ironically enough I posted a very similar thought in a Christian forum invaded by antitheists. Literally, hundreds of posters came to mock and snarl. Yet, predictably they could not come up with their own parameters of an observable and repeatable example. I purposefully don't feel the need either to provide my reasons for my thus far unstated beliefs. Admittedly, you can infer I believe in God. Now is he a sentient being etc. etc. Without the other party having a position to defend this seems silly. I've had numerous antitheists post there was no historical Jesus and any and all possibilities except supernatural up to and including alien seeding are possible. Seems to me everything is a possibility, but, a God. Now, if there is a God I love how mere mortals with extremely limited minds comparatively try to logically poke holes in his system. That is the height of vanity. Note, I said if. However, whoever, I contend is going to stranger than we can imagine. You seem to be reasonable and that's all I ask. I'm not here to proselytize, I am here to point out that the pompousness is not earned, and in fact should be embarrasing for someone so entrenched their only argument is disbelief in something. There are many thoughts within atheism, science, and religion so a broad brush doesn't really cover anything. Perhaps a better debate would be natural vs supernatural. The best either side will do is the something from nothing conundrum. I'm here for antitheists and don't want to offend reasonable people. Unfortunately, it's bound to happen with mudslinging from both sides.
I'd like to bring up the natural law here, but, feel it would be a waste of time. Anyway, I thought it might interest you. C.S. Lewis does the best job articulating natural law. Don't let the title scare you; Mere Christianity. No conversion attempts and I have no problem reading a suggestion of yours. Please, don't make it Dawkins.
I live in the county and my house rests on concrete. Had to cut off some of your post to fit.
oneear69

Hamilton, Canada

#314 Sep 1, 2009
It is time to reverse the prevailing notion that religious commitment is intrinsically deserving of respect, and that it should be handled with kid gloves and protected by custom and in some cases law against criticism and ridicule.
It is time to refuse to tip-toe around people who claim respect, consideration, special treatment, or any other kind of immunity, on the grounds that they have a religious faith, as if having faith were a privilege-endowing virtue, as if it were noble to believe in unsupported claims and ancient superstitions. It is neither. Faith is a commitment to belief contrary to evidence and reason, as between them Kierkegaard and the tale of Doubting Thomas are at pains to show; their example should lay to rest the endeavours of some (from the Pope to the Southern Baptists) who try to argue that faith is other than at least non-rational, given that for Kierkegaard its virtue precisely lies in its irrationality.
On the contrary: to believe something in the face of evidence and against reason - to believe something by faith - is ignoble, irresponsible and ignorant, and merits the opposite of respect. It is time to say so.
It is time to demand of believers that they take their personal choices and preferences in these non-rational and too often dangerous matters into the private sphere, like their sexual proclivities. Everyone is free to believe what they want, providing they do not bother (or coerce, or kill) others; but no-one is entitled to claim privileges merely on the grounds that they are votaries of one or another of the world's many religions.
And as this last point implies, it is time to demand and apply a right for the rest of us to non-interference by religious persons and organisations - a right to be free of proselytisation and the efforts of self-selected minority groups to impose their own choice of morality and practice on those who do not share their outlook.
John

Saint Louis, MO

#315 Sep 1, 2009
melevy wrote:
<quoted text>Not being an atheist, you don't have a leg to stand on when defining atheism. Since I am an atheist, I'll tell you what it means to me: it means that I do not believe in a "god" or higher power. That's it. Period. It has nothing to do with evolution or Darwin or science or any of the other things you ignorantly included.
That is disbelief.

Since: Aug 08

Somewhere in Ireland

#316 Sep 1, 2009
john wrote:
Unfortunately, many atheists are antitheists. Foreshadowing where this thread will end up I'll ask a simple question. What position are defending? Disbelief is not belief, and mocking religion/God is usually the response to a simple question. Stump an antitheist! Ask him what he believes. Post #7 Thanks nothing puppets.
Not difficult to answer. An atheist believes in many things, too numerous to mention in one post. He does not however believe in gods. I hope that was not too difficult for you to understand! If fundie nutjobs like you want to believe the BS that you do, fair enough, but I believe that when you inflict your superstitions on the children, and brainwash them with your nonsense, then it is nothing short of criminal. Throw your nonsense my way and I will just laugh at you, but kids tend to believe what an adult tells them, especially when it is repeated on a daily basis. Believe whatever religious superstitions you wish, but don't inflict them on the children!

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) 7 min Kaitlin the Wolf ... 7,211
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 35 min Kaitlin the Wolf ... 238,947
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 2 hr NoahLovesU 7,435
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 4 hr superwilly 88
why Atheists believe in incest,pedophilia and b... Thu thetruth 29
News .com | What hope is there without God? Wed Kaitlin the Wolf ... 26
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) May 20 thetruth 2,171
More from around the web