The Atheist Corner

[mazHur]

Yes you are right, it is beliefs that sully our minds. But it is religions that breed beliefs as a matter of fact. There are schools of religions or ideologies that indoctrinate highly gullible innocents into fundamentalist ideas. As such I am at times very critical of religions, and as a matter if fact seeing that most religious people are doing something wrongful in the name of religions I have grown tired of religious beleifs.

I have read in newspapers that bishops and clergymen are homosexuals and and we are not unaware of the fact that there were cases of molestations and rapes in churuces and as such I can not easily digest the idea of religions.

sorry, I can't stop laughing!

Man, what ''unusualities'' you are referring to are in no way related to religion, any religion,,,at their best, they are human conduct, socio-cultural impulses or simply rituals or orgies!

[Pendragon]

Yes you are right, it is beliefs that sully our minds. But it is religions that breed beliefs as a matter of fact. There are schools of religions or ideologies that indoctrinate highly gullible innocents into fundamentalist ideas. As such I am at times very critical of religions, and as a matter if fact seeing that most religious people are doing something wrongful in the name of religions I have grown tired of religious beleifs.

I have read in newspapers that bishops and clergymen are homosexuals and and we are not unaware of the fact that there were cases of molestations and rapes in churuces and as such I can not easily digest the idea of religions.

Do not be angry at me, dear friend, but ask yourself this: Is it any more wrong or right if molestations and rapes are happening to people without religion being at all involved? That some person could believe it OK to do this at all is overwhelming to any rational mind! But I follow court cases and you'd be amazed at the excuses given for such conduct!

God Bless

Pen

[Virgil]

The guys who blasted the twin towers were highly educated professional men raised/educated in the US.

That is flat out untrue. They were not raised or educated in the United States. I have never heard of such a thing and just looking up Atta will find that he was not:

Atta was born in Egypt in 1968 in a small town in the Nile delta. At the age of 10, he moved with his family to the Abdeen section of Cairo. Atta studied architecture at Cairo University, and went to Hamburg, Germany in 1992 to continue his studies at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, where he remained a student until fall 1999. In Hamburg, Atta became involved with the Al-Quds Mosque. At some point, he met Marwan al-Shehhi, Ramzi Binalshibh, and Ziad Jarrah who all became part of the Hamburg Cell. Atta disappeared from Germany for periods of time, spending some time in Afghanistan, including several months in late 1999 and early 2000 when he met Osama bin Laden and other top Al-Qaeda leaders. Atta and the other Hamburg Cell members were recruited by Bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for the "planes operation" in the United States. Atta returned to Hamburg in February 2000, reported his passport stolen and obtained a clean passport.

In late March 2000, Atta began contacting flight schools in the United States, inquiring about training. Atta arrived together with Marwan al-Shehhi in June 2000. Both ended up in south Florida at Huffman Aviation where they entered the Accelerated Pilot Program. Atta and al-Shehhi obtained instrument ratings in November 2000, and continued training on simulators and flight training. Beginning in May 2001, Atta assisted with the arrival of the muscle hijackers. In July 2001, Atta traveled to Spain where he met with Binalshibh to exchange information and finalize the plot. In August, Atta traveled on surveillance flights to determine details on how the attacks could be carried out.

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

There is enough misinformation (frankly lies, though i am not acusing you mazhur of purposely lying) out there that we should at east get the facts right.

[mazHur]

[Virgil]In late March 2000, Atta began contacting flight schools in the United States, inquiring about training.

went to Hamburg, Germany in 1992 to continue his studies at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, where he remained a student until fall 1999.

Truly i had not read his biography and thought they were brought up in the US,,,,Even if that is incorrect you will note that he learnt flying in the US and got educated in a developed country like the EU! And that in fact should be quite enought to say that they learnt the 'art' at least from a country where they learnt it!

In any case I think the terrorists, particularly the one who bombed Twin Towers were not laymen but educated people.
For people like me it's rather impossible for me to seduce even my 'shadow' to walk in step with me day and night, I wonder as to what made those terrorists kill themselves and other innocent people? Certainly, it's not the thought of heaven as incorrectly alleged by commonace as they have enough pelf here for seeking pleasure on earth!
There is certainly something .mysterious' to all that is going on around us but we don't know. Everybody is just guessing on the basis of abstract foundations, abstract enemy and sketchy and classified reports.

[Virgil]

Taking flight lessons in the US hardly amounts to being educated in the US. Those are two different things.

[Nightshade]

A friendly mod note: Please reread the forum rules, and think before you post, thank you.

[blazeofglory]

More often than not I feel there is an air of fundamentalism in all religions. I personally do not feel belonging to any particular religion. Born into an orthodoxy Hindu Brahmanic family I was once a very devoted to God and all the deities mentioned in scriptures.

I really support the characters of all religions like Krishna, Buddha, Mohmed. What I am critical of the way fundamentalists try to distort religions.

Of course some episodes really touch me in every religions if not all.

But what really saddens me now is the way some fundamentallists trying indoctrinating the innocent into their modes of thinking.

[Cellar Door]

As agnostic, I do not feel tied to any particular religion, however in college I was a philosophy major and so have studied (academically, not spiritually; the distinction must be made) most religions of the world. I think it would be correct to say that as long as one's beliefs about the spiritual world are not physically hurting anyone, they must be accepted. In other words, people should do what it takes to make it through the day.

As a matter of funding and scholarships, I also managed to earn a college degree in psychology, so here is that spiel: People must feel connected to the world around them; no man is an island. Some choose to do this through religion, others through contact with nature. The route is not important, only that people manage to feel connected every day, otherwise psychological suffering (and possible illness) ensues.

[Bitterfly]

What I'd like to hear is how atheistic belief makes this world better, makes people better? Simply responding that eliminating religion will make people better only says that the absence of religion improves people - but does it? What can you offer by way of evidence, example, etc that dispensing with the belief in a spiritual world improves the lot of humanity here on this earth?
.

I'd say your answer is contained in what you wrote: believing that you'll be rewarded in another world may stop you from acting to improve humanity's lot on earth, no? More seriously, do you really have the impression that countries where the majority of inhabitants are believers behave in a better way on the world stage than agnostic/atheist ones? I think you'll easily find quite a few examples to disprove that. I think a religious mindcast was possibly a civilizing influence in the past, but is so no longer.

By the way, I'm a total atheist, because I simply cannot believe a God exists. I feel no hostility towards believers though (except when they themselves are agressive or try to impose what I consider to be intolerant ideas; I don't like those who believe that women are inferior, or who oppose abortion, for instance)- on the contrary they rather intrigue me, in the same way as most religions do.

[Redzeppelin]

I'd say your answer is contained in what you wrote: believing that you'll be rewarded in another world may stop you from acting to improve humanity's lot on earth, no?

Except that Christians know that that cop-out is not acceptable; the New Testament is rife with commands to take care of those around you - your family, your neighnors, your community. Eternal accountability reminds the Christian that just "sitting back and waiting" for the return of Christ is not OK.

More seriously, do you really have the impression that countries where the majority of inhabitants are believers behave in a better way on the world stage than agnostic/atheist ones? I think you'll easily find quite a few examples to disprove that. I think a religious mindcast was possibly a civilizing influence in the past, but is so no longer.

Once again, do you notice how your response does what most atheist responses do? That instead of answering my post you've merely turned it back around on Christians again, by asking a rhetorical question that points to the idea that I'm implying that a nation of believers "behaves in a better way." I've said no such thing. What I'm asking is for atheists to step up to the plate and - for a change - instead of harping on how religion has damaged the world, explain how atheism makes the world a better place. Christianity has done stupid, cruel things - yes: but it has also changed countless lives in positive ways.

By the way, I'm a total atheist, because I simply cannot believe a God exists. I feel no hostility towards believers though (except when they themselves are agressive or try to impose what I consider to be intolerant ideas; I don't like those who believe that women are inferior, or who oppose abortion, for instance)- on the contrary they rather intrigue me, in the same way as most religions do.

I agree with all you've said with one caveat: it is not always "imposing intolerant ideas" to tell people that God is real, that there are consequences for rejecting His offer of eternal life; remember - we believe this stuff is real, and we don't want to see anybody make choices that lead to eternal separation from God (something that no human on earth has yet to experience). Second, the Bible does not suggest that women are "inferior" to men or that they should be treated so. God may have a different idea about how we should relate to each other, but that relationship is not based in power (which is how all human relationships are perceived by).

[Bitterfly]

Except that Christians know that that cop-out is not acceptable; the New Testament is rife with commands to take care of those around you - your family, your neighnors, your community. Eternal accountability reminds the Christian that just "sitting back and waiting" for the return of Christ is not OK.

Agreed, and that's why the true Christians (or other believers, for that matter: one of the most charitable, tolerant people I met was a very devout Muslim woman) I know are exceedingly good people, full of good intentions (even if these can pave the way to hell, if I remember well ). Maybe the (my?) problem is that there are not enough true believers? As you say, they should have "eternal accountability" in mind, but being only human, they don't always act that way.
So I wonder whether it isn't because the "rules" that believers should follow create so many high expectations that we're necessarily disappointed when they don't follow them.

Once again, do you notice how your response does what most atheist responses do? That instead of answering my post you've merely turned it back around on Christians again, by asking a rhetorical question that points to the idea that I'm implying that a nation of believers "behaves in a better way." I've said no such thing. What I'm asking is for atheists to step up to the plate and - for a change - instead of harping on how religion has damaged the world, explain how atheism makes the world a better place. Christianity has done stupid, cruel things - yes: but it has also changed countless lives in positive ways.

OK, sorry if my argumentation isn't rigorous enough, it's often the case!
I suppose what I meant was that atheists seem, in general, to be more tolerant of differences. That when you have a set of rules and interdictions to obey, you're going to be less open-minded. And I must confess that, to my mind, atheism goes with education: religion, nowadays, often seems to thrive in uneducated (poor) countries or milieux. And education, once again for me, encourages open-mindedness, which in turn seems to be the one thing to make the world a better place.
I don't think, however, that religion has damaged the world. If you reread my previous post, you'll see I admitted it probably had a civilizing influence - at a time when secular laws were perhaps not strong enough to protect the weakest (especially). Nowadays, in most Western countries at least, I don't see the need for religion.

I agree with all you've said with one caveat: it is not always "imposing intolerant ideas" to tell people that God is real, that there are consequences for rejecting His offer of eternal life; remember - we believe this stuff is real, and we don't want to see anybody make choices that lead to eternal separation from God (something that no human on earth has yet to experience). Second, the Bible does not suggest that women are "inferior" to men or that they should be treated so. God may have a different idea about how we should relate to each other, but that relationship is not based in power (which is how all human relationships are perceived by).

I have no problem with your first idea, and can understand wanting to convince people (I do the same thing ). Then again, there are ways and ways of convincing people: nowadays, Christiansdo it pacifically enough, but that wasn't always the case. As for your second point, I certainly don't know the Bible well enough to argue with you convincingly but what I read in it does allows me to agree with you (up to a point: if women have to "submit" to their husbands, it does sort of imply they're inferior, no?).This said, too many people have used the Bible to defend sexist ideas... all those debates about the souls of women, or her association with the devil...

[absurda]

This discussion is endless. I don't know if I'm just shallow, but I really don't think that these labels matter. I'm not even sure if I am an agnostic! If your beliefs make you feel better, then I think you should stick to them, but remember that what is good for you is not necessarily good for others. However, most religions say that you should spread "God's word". That is the only aspect of religions that really bother me. Is it just a coincidence that the more people become religious, more money the Church gets? Let me be free to believe what I want, and spend my money as I wish!

[Pendragon]

This discussion is endless. I don't know if I'm just shallow, but I really don't think that these labels matter. I'm not even sure if I am an agnostic! If your beliefs make you feel better, then I think you should stick to them, but remember that what is good for you is not necessarily good for others. However, most religions say that you should spread "God's word". That is the only aspect of religions that really bother me. Is it just a coincidence that the more people become religious, more money the Church gets? Let me be free to believe what I want, and spend my money as I wish!

Ther is a vast difference between "spreading God's Word" and trying to force it upon people. A True Christian shares his beliefs and allows others to make their own decision.

Everyone on this forum knows I disagree with homosexuality, yet I have dear friends who are gay. I do not shun them or daily shout "You are headed for hell!" Spread the Word doesn't mean to force people to do anything. If God is dealing with them to change, they will somehow!

God Bless

Pen

[mazHur]

I disagree with homosexuality, yet I have dear friends who are gay. I do not shun them or daily shout "You are headed for hell!"


Pen

isn't it bad company? to have rapport with,say. gays?

[mazHur]

This discussion is endless. I don't know if I'm just shallow, but I really don't think that these labels matter. I'm not even sure if I am an agnostic! If your beliefs make you feel better, then I think you should stick to them, but remember that what is good for you is not necessarily good for others. However, most religions say that you should spread "God's word". That is the only aspect of religions that really bother me. Is it just a coincidence that the more people become religious, more money the Church gets? Let me be free to believe what I want, and spend my money as I wish!

I think spreading God's word, not necessarily the Bible, is common to almost all religions. As for Christianity there have been missionaries since centuries and they greatly helped convert savage people into good humans, the same goes right for Islam and other religions. But, I don't think there is any compulsion on you to 'pay money' to the church,,,,otherwise there is no harm in donating a dime if you liked!