Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 255279 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#16087 Apr 20, 2011
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
The majority are decent people. In my opinion, they have only a token voice any more. They aren't represented in the ranks of the powerful, a group that is sociopathic in the extreme, psychopathic at times. Think Cheney, Rove, Norquist - the public face of the eminence gris, which is just as predatory and Machiavellian.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/beware-the-... [make sure to peak at this, and the links contained at the top of the article]
It's like the church. Most of the church mice like Grippy and Les Claypool seem like decent people, except where dogma may have made them a little ugly or stubborn. But their leadership isn't decent anywhere - the Discovery Institutes, Dobsons, Pat Robertsons and worse. Same with Americans and their government. You're a nice guy. But you aren't represented.
This may be a fundamental difference between us. Most people do not accept that democracy is dead in America, an assumption or premise of mine.
I say that voting, signature collecting, assembling to redress differences, writing congressmen, running for office - all of the visible aspects of participatory democracy - are just eye wash. The power doesn't give a crap that most Americans have wanted the US out of Iraq and Bush/Cheney investigated for high crimes since 2006, when the Democrats were swept into the majority on a mandate. What did you get? Impeachment was off the table and Bush's war budget was approved to the nickel. Americans really have almost no say. It's mostly just a show.
Notice that if that's true, if nondemocratic corporocratic types now control the government on their own behalves, and if democracy is only an illusion, then you have lost your government, because revolution sure isn't an option. That era is gone for good. Musket against musket and cannon against cannon is now automatic weapon vs poisoning all of your food, air and water, shutting off your power, and firing a smart bomb up your dog's ass from low earth orbit.
Had you ever considered that popular control of the American government might already be lost? Do you see how that could be possible, and that if it happens/-ed, it could be irreversible?
I think its already happened. Class warfare is over, and our class - the middle class - lost. Lots of people never saw that such a war was waged. But it was, and we have an aristocratic class that is now above the law, like Bush, which is getting fabulously wealthy as the middle class returns to paupery.
Too cynical? If so, how?
No ... not too cynical. Frighteningly illuminating ... like striking the last match in a dark forest, surrounded by wolves ...

I must sleep ... I'll have to delve into the link a bit later ... good night.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#16088 Apr 20, 2011
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, at least concerning this particular post, I don't see where you actually have a complaint. The information he provided is true. The tone might or might not be a bit snide.
Certainly it doesn't rate up there with the copper guy's chortling about atheists going to hell. At least the way it read to me sounded like he was pleased with the concept.
Les might also note that copper dimes is a longtime troll with a new name. I can't remember even half of the names he's posted under.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#16089 Apr 20, 2011
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm with ya ... like 98%.
I just don't think we are supporting governments or "impoverishing billions" as a consequence of our life styles. Why can't the governments of the impoverished billions take some responsibility? Why can't the milling masses, the impoverished billions, the people themselves take arms or plowshares and do something for themselves? Why does it have to be the fault of our government, who seems occasionally to consider the general population a little bit (sometimes maybe).
I was in the oil exploration business, I traveled extensively ... these operations and the resulting discoveries pump BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, employ many local people ... I mean, we're NOT STEALING the damn oil from them ... we are BUYING IT!! Not our fault if their governments are ripping them off, funneling the money or whatever. I know, I know ... we're "propping" up undesirable governments or whatever by dealing with them ... we don't do that because it's FUN people, it's not a hobby or something. If we want their OIL we gotta kiss some ass!!
By falling in step with the AMERICA KNOCKERS you are contributing to the decline and dissolution of something that WAS undeniably great, wonderful, the pinnacle of human endeavor.
Anyway ... I gotta crash ...
Sure, you are correct, if we ignore history. First, the reason the world is set up the way it is is because European powers divided it thusly - and America in the last 200 years. When they left their colonial empires, they divided their colonies in the way that would cause the most instability - European governments knew exactly what to do to ensure that these developing nations could not develop.

Second, the monetary system in place keeps poor countries poor - the IMF and World Bank have lofty goals but have been repeated shown to be failing at these goals. They admit it themselves - look at the development book list I sent you, or just check out their own website. They are bankers and have no problems admitting failure - and that is all you see on almost every single development project. What this does is impoverish these governments - and peoples - and subject them to the power of the developed nations.

Third, many of those governments are corrupt because our nations put them there. In all of the central/south American nations I listed above, most of the Caribbean ones, and many of the Arabic ones, the developing countries' governments are in place because we put them there. Sadam, Noriega, Pinochet, and more. So, yeah, corrupt, backed by Western money, put in place by our nations - us. Of course they do what we want and bankrupt their own nations.

So, no, I don't think that individual actors in the oil companies - I have worked in the oil business myself, but not internationally - are evil or trying to impoverish people, but the structure of the world is such that developing countries will have debt and will not succeed (without global restructuring).

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#16090 Apr 20, 2011
Hidingfromyou wrote:
I believe that the people are convinced by government that their military interventions are necessary, but when military interventions are scrutinized, they usually don't hold up to the morals they espouse.
Of course. Beyond any reasonable doubt. That's the patriotic side. It appears that a nation went to fetch ExxonMobil some Iraqi oil based on deliberate lies. People had to be convinced to pony up their children - willingly if they didn't want a draft - and their tax dollars to finance this move that obviously could only benefit the oil companies, and the companies that outfit war like Halliburton and Blackwater.

But make it a crusade for Jesus, or for truth, justice, and the American way, and get those bumper stickers out there telling God to bless America - BTW, how did that work out last time?-- and you've got the people's support.

I don't think you can be too cynical here.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#16091 Apr 20, 2011
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok. That was just weird, and not weird in a good way.
Got to say, the guy had a wonderful speaking voice. One could see why his little godbots would be so entranced by him.
Kinda scary...not in a hellfire and brimstone way. Rather, he was defining anyone as not in his little group as "wicked" and on the verge of being a serial killer. One could easily see one of his followers deciding God had chosen him to take out the garbage.
While the speaker was speaking in a very pleasant, calm tone, there was a lot of hate in that speech.
The irony there is that this sort of ideology is more likely to produce a serial killer. It's so much easier to justify murder when the victim is perceived as evil and vile, less than human.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#16092 Apr 20, 2011
gettagrip wrote:
Thats a bold faced lie, as I have read atheist after atheist argue about the topic, and accusing each other of not being a true atheist.
<quoted text>
Ok then grippy, write me ONE sentence of atheist dogma if you are so sure it exists.

Just One Sentence.

I challenge your cult infested brain to come up with it now:

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#16093 Apr 20, 2011
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
No man is an island unto himself IANS, my friend. Your words resonate, they sting ... but the truth in them, undeniable. You and Hiding have shaken my Vulcan composure. Fascinating.
Sorry, dude. It's just like crawling out of the religion cocoon. You conclude that you were sold a bill of goods. The reality is shocking at first, unbelievable. There must be some mistake. Then anger.

Finally, acceptance, with sarcasm and disesteem. The stages of grief, my man. If you go through the political version of this, it will be just like the religious one in most ways - lengthy, shocking, disorienting, maddening. If you go through this, you will be watching Lady Liberty die the way you watched Jesus die in your escape from religious dogma. That hurts. That's grieving. I'm done on both fronts.

When I hear you tell of the net good America does against a backdrop of few flaws, it sounds like a Christian telling me how much net good the church does notwithstanding the odd bad apple. That's the view from within, from a weekly church goer who just sees Sunday morning smiles, hymns, and airy words. What's not to like? How is this institution not goodness and light?

Ask yourself if that could be right. I'm not even going to say I'm right, even though you must surely realize that I think that I am. BTW, I have always wanted to be wrong about this.

If you pursue learning about your country like you did your church and bible, you may end up in the same place - disillusioned. I did.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#16094 Apr 20, 2011
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, you are correct, if we ignore history. First, the reason the world is set up the way it is is because European powers divided it thusly - and America in the last 200 years. When they left their colonial empires, they divided their colonies in the way that would cause the most instability - European governments knew exactly what to do to ensure that these developing nations could not develop.
Second, the monetary system in place keeps poor countries poor - the IMF and World Bank have lofty goals but have been repeated shown to be failing at these goals. They admit it themselves - look at the development book list I sent you, or just check out their own website. They are bankers and have no problems admitting failure - and that is all you see on almost every single development project. What this does is impoverish these governments - and peoples - and subject them to the power of the developed nations.
Third, many of those governments are corrupt because our nations put them there. In all of the central/south American nations I listed above, most of the Caribbean ones, and many of the Arabic ones, the developing countries' governments are in place because we put them there. Sadam, Noriega, Pinochet, and more. So, yeah, corrupt, backed by Western money, put in place by our nations - us. Of course they do what we want and bankrupt their own nations.
So, no, I don't think that individual actors in the oil companies - I have worked in the oil business myself, but not internationally - are evil or trying to impoverish people, but the structure of the world is such that developing countries will have debt and will not succeed (without global restructuring).
Particularly since the end of WWII, our governments goal in foreign policy has had little to do with our American ideals and a whole lot to do with 1) containing the communists and 2) promoting American business concerns. If it required supporting some nasty dictators, then so be it.

Putting the Shah in power was one example (and one I am particularly disgusted with). Iran had a popularly elected government, and the Iranian people loved it. But (!!!) it wasn't very friendly to Western oil companies. Ergo...the CIA helped oust the government the Iranians wanted and put the Shah into power, someone much more to the liking of the oil companies.

If someone tried to do that to us, there would be war on a massive scale. But since we are the US and the US can do no wrong...well, you get the idea. Hypocrisy abounds.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#16095 Apr 20, 2011
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course. Beyond any reasonable doubt. That's the patriotic side. It appears that a nation went to fetch ExxonMobil some Iraqi oil based on deliberate lies. People had to be convinced to pony up their children - willingly if they didn't want a draft - and their tax dollars to finance this move that obviously could only benefit the oil companies, and the companies that outfit war like Halliburton and Blackwater.
But make it a crusade for Jesus, or for truth, justice, and the American way, and get those bumper stickers out there telling God to bless America - BTW, how did that work out last time?-- and you've got the people's support.
I don't think you can be too cynical here.
Couldn't agree more. I can get pretty cynical here.

At least some of them are being prosecuted in Spain and they were up for prosecution in Germany - those countries have laws that allow for people to be prosecuted for war crimes even if they are outside the state. And, if convicted, it would be binding to all of the EU. I'm obviously hoping they proceed.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#16096 Apr 20, 2011
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Particularly since the end of WWII, our governments goal in foreign policy has had little to do with our American ideals and a whole lot to do with 1) containing the communists and 2) promoting American business concerns. If it required supporting some nasty dictators, then so be it.
Putting the Shah in power was one example (and one I am particularly disgusted with). Iran had a popularly elected government, and the Iranian people loved it. But (!!!) it wasn't very friendly to Western oil companies. Ergo...the CIA helped oust the government the Iranians wanted and put the Shah into power, someone much more to the liking of the oil companies.
If someone tried to do that to us, there would be war on a massive scale. But since we are the US and the US can do no wrong...well, you get the idea. Hypocrisy abounds.
Yeah, and now the US government seems to be building a popular movement against Iran, so that they can attack again. The interesting thing is that the normal people of Iran are pretty ok. They just want a middle class life and want their government not to be insane - the very gov't that the US put in place. Most of the normal people in Arabic nations are hoping that Iran actually does get a nuclear weapon, because they believe it will promote stability. This viewpoint relies on the MAD deterrent. You can't attack a nuclear nation without serious consequences.

But, Chomsky problematized your take on the "Cold War" and pointed out that the USSR tried in earnest to negotiate with the US but was shot down at every turn. USSR wanted to reduce weapons first, but Regan wouldn't hear of it, etc. Chomsky's view is that the Cold War was really just an extension of American policy to protect its economic interests and had little to do with communism other than lip service - so that the people could believe in something.
gettagrip

United States

#16097 Apr 20, 2011
Case and point. Thank you. Christians take note.
I was once criticized by an atheist who told me, "if you cannot argue the case, its wrong to go after the person." Perfect example.
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Who in their right mind would listen to Lee Strobel? He's right up there with Kent Hovind when it comes to being a feckless liar.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#16098 Apr 20, 2011
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, and now the US government seems to be building a popular movement against Iran, so that they can attack again. The interesting thing is that the normal people of Iran are pretty ok. They just want a middle class life and want their government not to be insane - the very gov't that the US put in place. Most of the normal people in Arabic nations are hoping that Iran actually does get a nuclear weapon, because they believe it will promote stability. This viewpoint relies on the MAD deterrent. You can't attack a nuclear nation without serious consequences.
But, Chomsky problematized your take on the "Cold War" and pointed out that the USSR tried in earnest to negotiate with the US but was shot down at every turn. USSR wanted to reduce weapons first, but Regan wouldn't hear of it, etc. Chomsky's view is that the Cold War was really just an extension of American policy to protect its economic interests and had little to do with communism other than lip service - so that the people could believe in something.
Don't agree with you on everything, but I'm not so wedded to my ideas that I will say you are absolutely wrong either.

Both the US and Russia did a lot of saber rattling during the Cold War. The Soviets were always pretty expansionist except right at the end. Even in the early 80's they were trying to push into Afghanistan. That little war bankrupted them...a little lesson Bush & Co. could have learned from...but didn't. Now we are piling up debt thanx to the two-war-legacy Bush left behind.

Still, I can't argue against economics being a major factor in the start of any war.

Have you ever listened to Sting's "If the Russians Love Their Children Too"? Written in the late Cold War...middle 80's...I always thought it had some powerful anti-war lyrics.

In Europe and America, there's a growing feeling of hysteria
Conditioned to respond to all the threats
In the rhetorical speeches of the Soviets
Mr. Krushchev said we will bury you
I don't subscribe to this point of view
It would be such an ignorant thing to do
If the Russians love their children too

How can I save my little boy from Oppenheimer's deadly toy
There is no monopoly in common sense
On either side of the political fence
We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too

There is no historical precedent
To put the words in the mouth of the President
There's no such thing as a winnable war
It's a lie we don't believe anymore
Mr. Reagan says we will protect you
I don't subscribe to this point of view
Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too

We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
What might save us, me, and you
Is if the Russians love their children too
gettagrip

United States

#16099 Apr 20, 2011
“"Some examples of atheist dogma:
-The universe is self-exist­ing and self created.
-The Earth is approximat­ely 4.5 billion years old.
-Life began as a result of spontaneou­s generation­.

Here are three. If you would like to search through these threads you find several arguments pertainng to the same.
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok then grippy, write me ONE sentence of atheist dogma if you are so sure it exists.
Just One Sentence.
I challenge your cult infested brain to come up with it now:

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#16100 Apr 20, 2011
paint it black wrote:
<quoted text>
sorry if you think i butchered what you said. i just kept the quotes that i was responding to.
so if i misunderstood you, please, clarify.
your point about athiests was that lumping them all together is like lumping christians together. that they are a very diverse group. my point is that (whether you "believe" in athiests or not) we have a lack of faith in common, whereas, all christians, whatever brand, have the presence of faith in common. is that better? make sense?
and where am i wrong about the Mary thing? She's regarded as a saint, not a deity. therefore, not "worshipped," as you inaccurately claim. this is a pretty common misconception, i was just doing my part to clear it up.
and the last part... i don't really think that needs explanation. but i'll try, so that maybe you can understand. everyone is right in their own mind. you are. i am. therefore everyone is wrong in someone else's mind. it will always be that way.
I think it's hilarious that grippy thinks that most Christians aren't really "true" Christians at all, but he thinks that atheists are just Christians in denial. Those kind of mental gymnastics tend to sprain a brain... which might go a long way to explaining how he "thinks."
US a Militarist Empire

Santa Clara, CA

#16101 Apr 20, 2011
Most you should come over to 'Bush Is Hero' Thread teach most of Warring Christians Neocons that had forgone its moral values and principles ... bunch religious nuts etc., teach about virtue of moral and ethics, and human sanctity of life, and about what atrocities of wars can do world human race... Any takers?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#16102 Apr 20, 2011
gettagrip wrote:
“"Some examples of atheist dogma:
-The universe is self-exist­ing and self created.
-The Earth is approximat­ely 4.5 billion years old.
-Life began as a result of spontaneou­s generation­.
Here are three. If you would like to search through these threads you find several arguments pertainng to the same.
I don't know where you get your facts, but the last time I checked, atheism = lack of belief in god.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#16103 Apr 20, 2011
gettagrip wrote:
“"Some examples of atheist dogma:
-The universe is self-exist­ing and self created.
Do you deny the universe exists? That's not dogma, that's a fact. The universe encompasses EVERYTHING, so YES it IS self created, regardless of whether your believe in god or not.
gettagrip wrote:
-The Earth is approximat­ely 4.5 billion years old.
That's a scientific fact, not 'atheist dogma"
gettagrip wrote:
-Life began as a result of spontaneou­s generation­.
That's a scientific theory, with hard evidence to back it up, not "atheist dogma"
gettagrip wrote:
Here are three. If you would like to search through these threads you find several arguments pertainng to the same.
<quoted text>
You haven't presented any dogma, you've just stated a bunch of scientific facts and a theory.

Now. Will you admit there is no such thing as atheist dogma?

Atheism is lack of belief in god. No more and no less.

It appears that you have a serious problem with understanding science, scientific facts and the difference between scientific facts, theories and dogma.

I suggest you educate yourself before you continue to make a fool of yourself here with your errors.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#16104 Apr 20, 2011
gettagrip wrote:
Thats a bold faced lie, as I have read atheist after atheist argue about the topic, and accusing each other of not being a true atheist.
<quoted text>
Where?

Infant.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#16105 Apr 20, 2011
US a Militarist Empire wrote:
Most you should come over to 'Bush Is Hero' Thread teach most of Warring Christians Neocons that had forgone its moral values and principles ... bunch religious nuts etc., teach about virtue of moral and ethics, and human sanctity of life, and about what atrocities of wars can do world human race... Any takers?
Sounds like fun, but I'm already on too many threads as it is. Plus arguing with THOSE nuts would probably shoot my BP through the roof.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#16106 Apr 20, 2011
Blob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I bet you are not as mean and vile as I am???
Infant.

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) 2 min Demon Finder 13,239
There are no such things as gods or fairies 17 min Amused 33
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 17 min Demon Finder 51,123
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 24 min MIDutch 31,176
Religion is the cause of war and most suffering... 47 min thetruth 19
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 48 min thetruth 9,719
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 51 min thetruth 4,349
More from around the web