Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258482 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.

LCNlin

United States

#195952 Dec 25, 2013
In the story, Tiny Tim is known for the statement,

"God bless us, every one!"

which he offers as a blessing at Christmas dinner.

Dickens repeats the phrase at the end of the story; this is symbolic of Scrooge's change of heart.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#195953 Dec 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but I really can't connect your assorted comments into an argument. There is no possibility of making progress in these discussions if you don't make your points explicitly as clear, direct, declarative sentences, and if you won't address the points I make.
I said that your bible and its god endorsed rape and slavery, and provided you a litany of illustrations from scripture of your god supporting that claim. You dismissed it all out of hand as "copy-and-paste" from a "hostile" site, then deflected to a different topic - arranged marriages - and a request that I name two examples of slave revolts from the Old Testament, which I didn't bother with for reasons I gave.
The real reason is because you are biblical illiterate and i proved you copy paste from hostile websites by posting the sites. That is why i asked you the question. To prove a point. Your so called reasons are nothing more than excuses. All that matters is you could not answer the question. Yet you insist on quoting Bible verses out of context void of historical understanding. I address your point but they are not what you want to hear. In your case it is easier to believe a lie than it is to accept the truth. You rant against faith ignoring the fact your faith is in your atheism. Even though you cannot prove any of your assumptions and your atheism explains nothing. You have admitted as much. You have not cited any explicit examples of rape. I have and have also cited the penalty imposed on the rapists. Namely death. In the case of Dinah it was not an eye for an eye. It was an eye for everybody's eye associated with the rapist. It was over kill. I simply debate to expose, to draw you out. Others have too. Folks like you can only exist on the Internet. In front of a live audience you folks would be a joke.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#195954 Dec 25, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheists are imaginary to you Dave, you only imagined you were one.
Aura, are you saying I wasn't a True Believer such as yourself?

I am mortified.

But that is what I get for being self educated and not going to school for it like you. We didn't have schools to learn how to be an Atheist back then.

Merry Christmas, Aura.

Maybe one of your kids can assemble your presents for you.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#195955 Dec 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Only in the same sense that left-handedness, having an IQ over 160, and having type AB blood are abnormal.
Rational ethicists reject religious dogma. We aren't affected by what Christians think their god says.
There are lots of congenital defects that are abnormal also, IANS. Diseases are also abnormal unless the majority has it.

Those you describe there are neither.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#195956 Dec 25, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. by chance, do you have a link wherein this presumable Christian tribe has condemned lifetime Imprisonment of homosexuals ??.
Lifetime imprisonment involves AIDS infected people knowingly passing it on to others. Seduction of minors and handicapped. Repeat offenders. Which is appropriate for repeat felony offenders. Why are you singling out Uganda when the death sentence is legal for gays in Muslim countries? It is not even law yet. It has to be signed by the President.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_in_Islam

''In most of the Islamic world homosexuality is not socially accepted, as opinion polls demonstrate (see below). In nine Muslim countries, Afghanistan, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, the UAE, and Yemen, homosexual activity carries the death penalty.[1][2][3][4]''

Same with the United States. Penalize Uganda, Give Saudi Arabia a pass.

http://www.usasurvival.org/ck02.04.10.html

While the homosexual lobby here and abroad has mobilized its resources to create that impression, Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College, a conservative Christian institution, has also been working with the "gay rights" movement to attack supporters of the legislation. In response, Peter LaBarbera of the group Americans for Truth about Homosexuality has asked, "What qualifies the United States to lecture Uganda about homosexuality? LaBarbera says Throckmorton, once known as a conservative, has become a "fellow traveler" of the homosexual movement.

President Museveni

Referring to the controversial death penalty provision, which has gotten most of the media attention, Tuhaise told AIM: "The death penalty was included for the most severe homosexual offences where the offender would expose a victim to the risk of a dangerous disease like AIDS, which has no cure. If one willfully puts others (including innocent children in their care) at risk of death, then a deterrent penalty of death makes sense. And it has been a law for heterosexual abusers since 1997. So why is it causing so much fracas when it is applied to homosexual abusers?"
.. I'm not reading any disgust by Christians regarding Uganda's new law and it was at the behest of American Evangelicals that Ugandan parliament passed the law making homosexuality a life-in-prison offense.
The only disgust you will get from me is your knee jerk reactions. Homosexuality is banned in many parts of the world. Yet you fixate on Uganda. They do not accept homosexuality in Uganda. Get over it.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#195957 Dec 25, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Aura, are you saying I wasn't a True Believer such as yourself?
I am mortified.
But that is what I get for being self educated and not going to school for it like you. We didn't have schools to learn how to be an Atheist back then.
Merry Christmas, Aura.
Maybe one of your kids can assemble your presents for you.
You meant a non-believer, see that's why you weren't true.
My kids put my present together? LOL



Merry Christmas

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#195958 Dec 25, 2013

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#195959 Dec 25, 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fethullah_G%C3%B...

Interesting person with some brains. There is a struggle going on in Turkey involving him.

A new Pope with fresh ideas, a man like this, and I suspect a few more rational and enlightened ones at work. Could be an interesting future.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#195960 Dec 25, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
My question is this: if, your bible was actually **useful** at imparting correct moral lessons? Should we not see a **marked** decline in pedophilia among those who follow your bible? What we **do** see, instead, is the exact **opposite**. We see a marked **increase** in the number of pedophiles among the **religious** organizations when compared to the **secular** ones. Proving once and for all, that the bible is **useless** as a "moral guide".
Good post, Bob.

What you describe is very similar to a controlled clinical trial to determine if a potential therapeutic intervention such as a surgery, a dietary recommendation, a set of exercises, or a medication has an effect, and if so, what effect and to what degree.

You divide a population into two cohorts of people that are otherwise roughly the same in terms of the distribution of ages, gender, and any other relevant variables, administer the intervention to one group but not the other, and measure outcomes.

In this case, you have a nation of Americans with the Christian ethical program being administered to some but not others, and a variety of demographic studies showing the differences between those calling themselves Christians and those raised in alternative traditions, followed by determining the differences in murder and violent crime rates, prison sentences, divorce rates, etc,.between the two..

At http://www.scribd.com/doc/37725046/Zuckerman-... , one can read Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being: How the Findings of Social Science Counter Negative Stereotypes and Assumptions by Phil Zuckerman Ph.. This is a meta-study that summarizes the findings of a few dozen constitutent studies, and categorizes them under the headings Criminality and Moral Conduct, Life Satisfaction and Psychological Well-Being, Family and Children, Sex and Sexuality. What it shows is that the Christian system produces poorer outcomes than the alternative, which in America, is predominantly the values and methods of secular humanism.

Here is an excerpt of one such summary, and citations of the original work that supports it:

"If religion, prayer, or God-belief hindered criminal behavior, and secularity or atheism fostered lawlessness, we would expect to find the most religious nations having the lowest murder rates and the least religious nations having the highest. But we find just the opposite. Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is deep and widespread (Jensen 2006; Paul 2005; Fajnzylber et al. 2002; Fox and Levin 2000).":

Here's a similar paper published Evolutionary Psychology called "The Chronic Dependence of Popular Religiosity upon Dysfunctional Psychosociological Conditions" by Gregory Paul
http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/E... as well as a discussion of the topic of determining these statistic also by Paul at http://www.gspaulscienceofreligion.com/

I think the data scientifically confirms that humanists offer a superior product, and where the Christian and humanist values overlap, our method of teaching seems to be superior as well. For example, humanists embody the Golden Rule and the maxim to love one another much better than the Christian population, as the recent conversation in this thread about the treatment of gays by the believers and unbelievers offering opinions confirms. The unbelievers base their opinions on compassion - a sense of fairness - whereas the Christians tend to repeat their church's divisive and demeaning homophobic doctrine as if that trumped compassion.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#195961 Dec 25, 2013
scaritual wrote:
"The atheist position is not that the answer is no. It is that there is no reason to ask the question." - fukrot
I like that.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#195962 Dec 25, 2013
Rosa_Winkel wrote:
"There are two teams out there but only one of them is playing cricket." - William Maldon Woodfull
http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/woodfull-will...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodyline
If you want to know why I posted that one, it was a reference to some of the tactics used by "good Christians" on these threads.
Happy Holidays, Rosa, whichever one(s) if any you celebrate. Yesterday, I learned what a boomer is down under from a Kiwi buddy of mine, when he referred to boomers replacing reindeer in Santa's sleigh. Where I come from, I'm a (baby) boomer - someone born between 1946 and 1964.

By the way, I have been learning some Ozzie slang from you and Juice - Banana Benders and Cockies most recently. Yes, I look it all up. What a huge dividend of global Internet message boards and Google.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#195963 Dec 25, 2013
River Tam wrote:
I just posted in a West Virginia forum. Apparently, Topix has a new security deal wherein you have to answer a riddle.
They just asked an amputee what's harder?
1. Walking and chewing gum.
2. Hopping on one leg.
WTF?
LOL.

Do you run into a lot of lack-toes intolerance?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#195964 Dec 25, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Merry Christmas, I-man. Spiritual blessings to you and Mrs. I-man.
Thanks. I just passed along your glad tidings.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#195965 Dec 25, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
with leprechauns there is evidence to contradict their existence, not just absence of evidence.
What would the positive evidence of the nonexistence of leprechauns be?
Buck Crick wrote:
And a criticism of Stalinism IS a criticism of atheism. It was an essential element of his policies.
Disagree. His beliefs could have been exactly the same save for a god belief, and he wouls have been the same psychopathic killer.
Buck Crick wrote:
"Atheism, therefore, mixed with other noxious ideas, is an essential part of the motivation to persecute believers, and it is this form that Stalinism manifested. Atheism was not therefore incidental to the Soviet regime’s ill treatment, suppression, and murder of believers, but a core belief that lay beneath the process."
Atheism may have been a reason to target believers, but not a reason to murder them. It was the other "noxious ideas" mixed in that facilitated genocide, not the atheism.
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#195966 Dec 25, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
One thing Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot had in common was being raised as devout Catholics. Hitler never denounced his belief in god and neither did Pol Pot.
Only Stalin was a genuine atheists.
The Ukrainian genocide had nothing to do with religion but politics. The White Russians were seen as traitors.
There have been (and are) very few Atheist world leaders.
BTW, non-religious is NOT atheism.
You are like unto a ostrich with his head in sand.
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#195967 Dec 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Good post, Bob.
What you describe is very similar to a controlled clinical trial to determine if a potential therapeutic intervention such as a surgery, a dietary recommendation, a set of exercises, or a medication has an effect, and if so, what effect and to what degree.
You divide a population into two cohorts of people that are otherwise roughly the same in terms of the distribution of ages, gender, and any other relevant variables, administer the intervention to one group but not the other, and measure outcomes.
In this case, you have a nation of Americans with the Christian ethical program being administered to some but not others, and a variety of demographic studies showing the differences between those calling themselves Christians and those raised in alternative traditions, followed by determining the differences in murder and violent crime rates, prison sentences, divorce rates, etc,.between the two..
At http://www.scribd.com/doc/37725046/Zuckerman-... , one can read Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being: How the Findings of Social Science Counter Negative Stereotypes and Assumptions by Phil Zuckerman Ph.. This is a meta-study that summarizes the findings of a few dozen constitutent studies, and categorizes them under the headings Criminality and Moral Conduct, Life Satisfaction and Psychological Well-Being, Family and Children, Sex and Sexuality. What it shows is that the Christian system produces poorer outcomes than the alternative, which in America, is predominantly the values and methods of secular humanism.
Here is an excerpt of one such summary, and citations of the original work that supports it:
"If religion, prayer, or God-belief hindered criminal behavior, and secularity or atheism fostered lawlessness, we would expect to find the most religious nations having the lowest murder rates and the least religious nations having the highest. But we find just the opposite. Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is deep and widespread (Jensen 2006; Paul 2005; Fajnzylber et al. 2002; Fox and Levin 2000).":
Here's a similar paper published Evolutionary Psychology called "The Chronic Dependence of Popular Religiosity upon Dysfunctional Psychosociological Conditions" by Gregory Paul
http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/E... as well as a discussion of the topic of determining these statistic also by Paul at http://www.gspaulscienceofreligion.com/
I think the data scientifically confirms that humanists offer a superior product, and where the Christian and humanist values overlap, our method of teaching seems to be superior as well. For example, humanists embody the Golden Rule and the maxim to love one another much better than the Christian population, as the recent conversation in this thread about the treatment of gays by the believers and unbelievers offering opinions confirms. The unbelievers base their opinions on compassion - a sense of fairness - whereas the Christians tend to repeat their church's divisive and demeaning homophobic doctrine as if that trumped compassion.
Boys, put your pant legs in your cowboy boots cause the bull sh*t is getting deep in here.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#195968 Dec 25, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
Homosexual disgust as opposed to fear is more appropriate. Things like this will no doubt be the cause of a backlash if they continue and they will. Sounds like a threat. Won't happen in my neck. Certainly in liberal Oregon.
The "-phobia" in homophobia refers to an aversion to gays, not a fear of them. Assuming otherwise would be the root fallacy.
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#195969 Dec 25, 2013
Jim wrote:
<quoted text>
Religion gives idiots the self-belief to speak up and share their ignorant opinions with society.
Thank you for your wonderful opinion and sharing it with all us boots.

[inserting boot over piss ant]

[stepping down on top of piss ant]

[crunch]
Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#195970 Dec 25, 2013
Jim wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the religious idiot with no evidence of god whatsoever.
That statement sounds all too familiar. I’d bet that’s our dear friend “Skeptic,” reincarnated.

Eagle 12

Edwardsville, IL

#195971 Dec 25, 2013
Jim wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism is a disbelief in religion and religious liars like you Buck.
Stalinism is a political philosophy of Stalin and has nothing to do with Atheism.
History says otherwise.

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 Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... (Jan '17) 13 min yehoshooah adam 4,325
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 1 hr brenda6 899
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr John 32,291
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 11 hr 15th Dalai Lama 77,078
Atheists are subhuman filth that need to be exe... 13 hr Roec 1
Religion sux ? Tue Eagle 12 - 4
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... (Dec '16) Tue Frindly 291
More from around the web