Atheists....

[JGL57]

Seeing as it fits the topic of the thread, I'll tell you what this atheist believes in:

1) Doing your best not to be a complete and utter prat
2) Common courtesy
3) Using a reasonable amount of respect
4) Not trying to pick arguments (especially on an internet literature forum)
5) Attempting to make an intelligent point once in a while
6) Not eating my vegetables

I like vegetables so I would replace your #6 with "Use proper grammar and spelling."

[dramasnot6]

Seeing as it fits the topic of the thread, I'll tell you what this atheist believes in:

1) Doing your best not to be a complete and utter prat
2) Common courtesy
3) Using a reasonable amount of respect
4) Not trying to pick arguments (especially on an internet literature forum)
5) Attempting to make an intelligent point once in a while
6) Not eating my vegetables

Ill have to second all of those but 6(i like my veggies ) and sometimes 4...i lose my self control sometimes and get a bit pedantic

I believe in freedom of belief. Enough said?

[Matrim Cuathon]

I thought this was interesting:http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/...ary/17.24.html

ive gotten bored with the religion debate. its a waste of time. evnetually religion will fall and we arent speeding it up by arguing about it. give it time. thats what got us from the church threatening to torture Galileo to today.

its actually interesting that if you look at the whole picture, atheists have the higher moral ground.

[Chava]

When I said that I found religion redundant I didn't mean it to be used offensively. I don't mind people having religion, so long as they don't preach it to others, it's the same for atheists.

I think that the core values of christianity are fine, but I don't think you have to be religious to follow them. and contrary to JGL57 I have no nedd to disprove the existance of religion to others. It's enough for me that I don't believe it.
do you see?

[Redzeppelin]

ive gotten bored with the religion debate. its a waste of time. evnetually religion will fall and we arent speeding it up by arguing about it. give it time.

Maybe. Maybe not. Since some form of religion has existed throughout the recorded history of humanity, your prediction (prophecy?) is pretty bold. Perhaps religion does not persist because people are deluded, but because they realize the emptiness that a materialistic/naturalistic life ultimately contains.

its actually interesting that if you look at the whole picture, atheists have the higher moral ground.

I would love to have you explain this statement - since many atheists would have a fit if a Christian claimed the same thing. Care to explain how this statement is true? What exactly is this "whole picture" that reveals this "truth"?

[JGL57]

I’ve gotten bored with the religion debate. its a waste of time. Eventually religion will fall and we aren’t speeding it up by arguing about it. Give it time. That’s what got us from the church threatening to torture Galileo to today.

its actually interesting that if you look at the whole picture, atheists have the higher moral ground.

I agree with you that religious debates tend toward the boring. But progress is made and I think the debates here and on other forums do serve some good purposes. I have debated religion and social issues on line now for about 6 years now and I do see some dogmatic types, both religious and atheists, move toward a more agnostic viewpoint (I consider myself an agnostic atheist).

I think that, despite what you see in the media regarding absolutist/literalist types of religion, e.g., the unholy alliance between the Republican party and super nationalistic fanatical dogmatic (mainly) protestant "christians", I suspect in the fullness of time religion here in the west will move away from the more virulent types to more modern thinking types - more deistic and pantheistic, less theistic, and more toward a religion of love, empathy, mysticism, etc. and away from a religion of fear, hate, selfishness and radical ethnocentric sectarianism. It will take a few more decades to really see this trend. If I'm wrong, then I guess Planet of the Apes will eventually prove to be a documentary.

As to atheists having the "higher moral ground" I would say each individual atheist has the best chance at a rational moral perspective, if he or she puts in the effort to study the subject. Certainly, atheists who are, e.g., Marxists or Randians have missed the boat.

...contrary to JGL57 I have no need to disprove the existence of religion to others. It's enough for me that I don't believe it…

I don’t even know what this means, if anything. Religion exists - I don’t think I could prove otherwise, nor have I ever tried, nor would I ever try – may as well try to prove that crab grass doesn’t exist.

[ennison]

'that only three of the ten commandments are of any serious import'
ISD That's two too many. Let's scoff is the only one important as you said.
Reminds me. I'm hungry and a hungry man's a ......

[JGL57]

'that only three of the ten commandments are of any serious import'
ISD That's two too many. Let's scoff is the only one important as you said.
Reminds me. I'm hungry and a hungry man's a ......

I was referring to killing, stealing, and bearing false witness - prohibition of all which, in some form, seems to be a necessary part of societal laws, all the way back to Hammurabi's famous code. Christianity offered nothing startling new or needed re morality.

The other commandments, so-called, are either silly, or just good rule-of-thumb suggestions at best. I mean, not coveting your neighbor's "donkey" - do you, e.g., really need celestial guidance in that particular area?

And you are hungry. And why should anyone care?

[ennison]

I BEG YOUR PARDON ..... My Donkey is highly covetable!! I would be offended if it was not.
But of course my definition of silly wont match yours but I often covet the ability of the truly absurd to be very silly

[quasimodo1]

An atheist does not require any diety. An atheist can be ethical, spiritual and empathetic. Why do believers mostly think that atheists are anarchists or sociopaths? The Buhdists don't require a god; just a desire for enlightenment. RJS

[ennison]

'Christianity offered nothing startling new or needed re morality' Of course not. It's not about morality. Any old fool can be moral - Alexander Selkirk was a goody two-shoes. And if you reduce it all to .... whatever number suits yourself well shoot even I could be moral then even if I'm hungry enough to .....

[Scheherazade]

Final Warning

To All Concerned> As Moderators we have been doing more than our fair share of editing in this thread.

Please remember that as users of this Forum, its your responsibility to familiarise yourselves with its Rules (with which you agreed when you signed up) and further posts ignoring these rules will lead to thread closure.

[JGL57]

'Christianity offered nothing startling new or needed re morality' Of course not. It's not about morality. Any old fool can be moral - Alexander Selkirk was a goody two-shoes. And if you reduce it all to .... whatever number suits yourself well shoot even I could be moral then even if I'm hungry enough to .....

I apologize. Obviously Christianity has nothing to do with morality - one need only look at the overall record.

So, then, since it is indeed not about morality, then what is it's use?

[ennison]

................. to eat a scabby horse
Even if it aint my own. Sure we were just having fun oh mighty one ---- leastways I was but I promise on the pantheistic throbbing soul of the universe to never mention donkeys 'orses or 'unger agin ok?

Use? Ah the pragmatic approach again. Well a carpenter uses a saw - in fact it's indispensible to him. Clerk's don't need it. And there you go - I trust I make myself obscure.
Well let's see hmm the righteous have no need of Christianity.
Still obscure?
Ach I aint got the vocabulary

[JGL57]

................. to eat a scabby horse
Even if it aint my own. Sure we were just having fun oh mighty one ---- leastways I was but I promise on the pantheistic throbbing soul of the universe to never mention donkeys 'orses or 'unger agin ok?

I think I understand - but it would be simplier for you to just say "I have nothing new to add."