In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 51414 comments on the Spiked story from Apr 11, 2012, titled In America, atheists are still in the closet. In it, Spiked reports that:

So do many other interest and identity groups. Complaint is our political lingua franca: it's what Occupiers, Tea Partiers, Wall Street titans, religious and irreligious people share.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Spiked.

rider

Gwinn, MI

#16238 Jun 14, 2012
THE SECRET RIGHT VOLUME ONE-Josh Reeves(HIGH DEF ...
May 31, 2010 ... COMING SOON THE SECRET RIGHT VOLUME 2,UNTIL THEN WE PRESENT
FOR THE FIRST TIME VOLUME ONE IN HIGH DEFINITION.

- 184k -

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#16239 Jun 14, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
An allegory is an illustrative example of a principle important to instruction in a worldview.
Your strawmen get weaker with each use.
Buck!

What's up?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16240 Jun 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to define free will for us to decide if you're talking about what others are talking about. I'm pretty well convinced that free will as I define it is an illusion.
Worse, even if will is not determined by the brain or anything else, it would be pretty near impossible to demonstrate that will is free or uncaused.
And worse yet, free will means indeterminate will, and thus will that nobody can know in advance - nobody, not a god, and not even the self that apparently generated it.
Have you ever provided a definition of free will that would clearly distinguish it from other things that are NOT free will. or that would allow us to decide wither something in question qualified as free will?
Look at how I give lip service to the idea that you might do that, knowing full well that I will be the one to have to provide a definition of free will, including an operational definition.
My actual purpose here will be to show how you evade, in part with the deliberate choice to blur language and keep it indistinct. As chief obfuscator, your job will be to prevent a clear definition of free will - including a test - from emerging, so that you can continue to refer to free will as if it has definite properties, without having to say what those are.
Now, what is free will as you mean it?
With an omniscient god, there is no "in advance".

Everyone knows what free will is. Except you, apparently.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16241 Jun 14, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Hahaha
I like this.
And now we wait.
Hold your breath.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16242 Jun 14, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>I have found that some people, both theists and non-theists, ignore evidence that does not support their point of view. You seem to be in that group of theists who has such a fierce need to believe you are correct that you will ignore any evidence produced at any time and any place if it would mean you had to rethink your position.
Intelligence does not, unfortunately, rid one of this tendency.
Was that evidence?

No wonder I ignored it.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16244 Jun 14, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
God has been abolished in California.
It was done by initiative. Proposition 666.
Still want to come out here?
They can abolish a deity but can't balance a budget.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16245 Jun 14, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hang on a moment.
Let's say the omniscient entity (let's call it god, ok?) knows you are going to wear a green shirt.
Can you don a blue one?
If you say yes, no omniscience dude. Atemporal or not, he got it wrong.(Less'n he's color blind.)
Don't engage in tautological glossolalia.
The choice causes the knowledge, not vice versa.

It doesn't know you will wear the green shirt unless you choose to wear the green shirt.

If you choose to wear the blue shirt, it knows you will choose to wear the blue shirt.

The omniscience had no effect on your choice, or free will.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16246 Jun 14, 2012
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Free will cannot cause omniscience, because God is supposedly omniscient before humans with free will arrived.
How about the "God can do anything because it's God, logic be damned" argument? It's akin to taking your marbles and going home in a huff.
I'll correct you.

The assertion is not that free will caused the omniscience. The assertion is that a particular choice of free will caused the knowledge of the particular choice, and the choice is unaffected by the knowledge.

Your argument is a fallacy based on displaced causation. Omniscience has no effect on free will.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16247 Jun 14, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>On this we agree..to an extent.
But what is the purpose of creating humans just so they can learn they don't know sh*t?
Personally, I have always found that the more I know, the more questions I have. That goes with math, science, child rearing, cooking and a spiritual quest. But there is no purpose in a spiritual quest that has no end goal and only ends in 'you don't know sh*t'. If you start out with that assumption, you would never complete the quest. You would never find any true meaning.
This only means that knowledge is not the purpose.

To "know" things is fine. The problem is when the ego (devil, serpent) leads one to believe that knowledge takes him beyond his source (God).

"My crown is on my heart, not my head. It is a crown few kings will wear".

-Shakespeare

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16248 Jun 14, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't see that message in the Adam and eve story at all.
It says , "I am a magical being who will provide all your needs unless you figure out how to provide your own."
It is pure fairy tale. There is absolutely no allegorical value to this story. It has no basis in reality.
I didn't expect you to see it.

Jewish and Christian scholars don't even get it.

Autonomy of the self vs. unitive harmony.

I could recommend a book, if you like.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#16249 Jun 14, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text> Great books. Pure fantasy. Better fantasy than the Bible.
I think you'd be hard pressed to come up with a fiction or fantasy book that isn't more compelling than the Bible.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16250 Jun 14, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if you presuppose the why to not be about the mechanics. There's a certain amount of arrogance in doing that - you are force fitting the picture to be entirely about humans. And, in your belief system, it's about "souls" that are ever learning, moving toward something.
You're welcome to have this belief system. It won't add explanatory power to biological science, but it may be comforting to you.
It's no less arrogant to assume the "why" is only the mechanics.

My belief is not just about humans.

"If you can't see God in everything, you can't see it in anything".

Forgot the author.

Somebody decided that religion should be about something distant, separate from ourselves. They decided that ***, whatever one likes to call it, should be like a cosmic bell hop who, if beseeched, would bring things.*** would differentiate between people based on the beseeching, or their merit, or their purity.

Which is the exact opposite of what *** is, at least as far as what all insight I can gain into the subject says.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16251 Jun 14, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you'd be hard pressed to come up with a fiction or fantasy book that isn't more compelling than the Bible.
Maybe, but some of the Bible is profound.

I never understood how, if God exists, he is assumed to have spoken to one small group of people at one time in history, and gave them His final word on all things.

For instance, Paul never met Jesus. But his paranormal visions of Jesus are practically the full basis of Christianity. And Paul's teachings do not agree with what we have of Jesus' words.

But in 2012, if someone has a paranormal experience, or a NDE, if it disagrees with any scripture, he will be labeled evil.

Yet they meet every Sunday morning to celebrate the paranormal visitations of a deceptive Pharisee.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16252 Jun 14, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck!
What's up?
It's good here.

Start my repo job this weekend.

$40 per hook.

Got me a new set of brass knuckles.

Actually, I stole them.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#16253 Jun 14, 2012
Are they kissing in there?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#16254 Jun 14, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
It's no less arrogant to assume the "why" is only the mechanics.
My belief is not just about humans.
"If you can't see God in everything, you can't see it in anything".
Forgot the author.
Somebody decided that religion should be about something distant, separate from ourselves. They decided that ***, whatever one likes to call it, should be like a cosmic bell hop who, if beseeched, would bring things.*** would differentiate between people based on the beseeching, or their merit, or their purity.
Which is the exact opposite of what *** is, at least as far as what all insight I can gain into the subject says.
Like I wrote before, I like your belief system better than those of organized religions. Although I can't say I've tried every last one of them. Jainism might offer some interesting insights.

The danger I see in your belief system is one of complacency. You've written that the children who die prior to their 5th birthday, in misery because of poverty and disease, actually chose those lives. You've written that they are the wise souls who chose that life on earth.

That's a very dangerous path to take, because it could lead us away from attempting to end poverty in the same way that "poverty is beautiful" to the Catholic church.

So you have to include the very strong clause that our struggles have to be about making everyone's lives better, not just about contemplating our place in the cosmos, or your religion runs the risk of supporting damaging economic systems.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#16256 Jun 14, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I wrote before, I like your belief system better than those of organized religions. Although I can't say I've tried every last one of them. Jainism might offer some interesting insights.
The danger I see in your belief system is one of complacency. You've written that the children who die prior to their 5th birthday, in misery because of poverty and disease, actually chose those lives. You've written that they are the wise souls who chose that life on earth.
That's a very dangerous path to take, because it could lead us away from attempting to end poverty in the same way that "poverty is beautiful" to the Catholic church.
So you have to include the very strong clause that our struggles have to be about making everyone's lives better, not just about contemplating our place in the cosmos, or your religion runs the risk of supporting damaging economic systems.
Kindness and benevolence for the poor is part of my belief system.

I just don't blame unfortunate circumstances of birth on God.

Our life is for the particular lessons needed.

My own lesson must be for humility, as it seems always to be forced upon me.

...even born so smart and handsome.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#16259 Jun 14, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe, but some of the Bible is profound.
I never understood how, if God exists, he is assumed to have spoken to one small group of people at one time in history, and gave them His final word on all things.
For instance, Paul never met Jesus. But his paranormal visions of Jesus are practically the full basis of Christianity. And Paul's teachings do not agree with what we have of Jesus' words.
But in 2012, if someone has a paranormal experience, or a NDE, if it disagrees with any scripture, he will be labeled evil.
Yet they meet every Sunday morning to celebrate the paranormal visitations of a deceptive Pharisee.
Huh. Why was Paul included in the New Testament by the religious leaders? They must have liked his message if they tossed him in.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#16260 Jun 14, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Kindness and benevolence for the poor is part of my belief system.
I just don't blame unfortunate circumstances of birth on God.
Our life is for the particular lessons needed.
My own lesson must be for humility, as it seems always to be forced upon me.
...even born so smart and handsome.
Then you have tossed out the concept of original sin, which is good, and the various reincarnation ideas that explain poverty away as evil committed in past lives.

Humility as the persona, Buck, or the person behind the persona?

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#16261 Jun 15, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Your prejudice oozes from you.
Where is this benefit for mankind from religion that you're claiming? As I have been saying for months with you, you just claim it. You assume it. And you seem irritated that anybody could challenge the idea in good faith. Yet, you never have data - just your incredulity that anybody would even ask. Of course religion is helpful. It's helpful in so many lives Because it just is, right? Obviously.
And look at your absurd, cartoonish comparison. Religion apparently produces fields of flowers with rainbows without trying. It gives people "great things without fear, gives them strength and courage." Anybody can see that even with one eye closed, wouldn't you agree? It's just the very nature of religion, so there's no need for you to qualify. Religion - all of it, or most of it - gives courage.
But can it do harm. Apparently only if you are unlucky enough to accumulate "isolated naive groups of people" that "can be deceived and their intentions hijacked by charismatic religists" Because that's when bad things are possible with religion, right? Until then, it's butterflies and great courage.
Sorry, dude, but you're pretty gone. To you, religion is self-evidently wonderful, except very occasionally, when after a perfect storm of factors, it can be not so wonderful in an isolated way. Read your stuff again.
?

I acknowledge the good and the bad that religion may cause, and yet you say I am prejudiced? Do you even know what prejudice means? Or do you define it as Whatever doesn't agree with your hatred for religion?

I bet if I was an atheist rambling on and on about the evil of religion like a raging lunatic you would most certainly call me objective. Then you'll never call me prejudiced. No, I'll be absolutely fair then.

You are an old man and a fool who sits on the sidelines as an armchair critic. Get out of that chair, otherwise you'll just fade more and more out of touch with reality.

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 min Jacques in Ottawa 242,130
News Layoffs begin at Carrier plant that drew Trump'... 2 min Covfefe 61
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Joy 1,567,764
News Trump mistreats native son Jeff Sessions, Alaba... 3 min USA Today 40
News Trump bars transgender individuals from US arme... 3 min WasteWater 173
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min PolarisPutz 280,292
News Trump's transgender troops ban divides veterans... 6 min WasteWater 39
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 16 min WasteWater 18,066
News By a 2-to-1 margin, Americans prefer Obamacare ... 3 hr fingers mcgurke 590
More from around the web