Why do non-believers concern themselves with religion?

kelly1

---

MOD EDIT

Just allowing the splinter discussion from the "Religion is ‘the new social evil" thread some breathing space. There are some points here to be hammered out. Posts moved from that thread where possible.

So for the record Kelly1 hasn't started the thread - just the topic!

Thanks!

---

It's amazing, for an Atheist/Agnostic forum how much discussion here is around religion. But then again why bother discussing something you don't believe in...

Also I would imagine a high percentage of posters here don't just have no belief in God, but are in fact anti-religion.

Might be good idea to rename this forum to Atheism, Agnosticism and Anti-theism maybe?

CerebralCortex

kelly1 wrote: »

It's amazing, for an Atheist/Agnostic forum how much discussion here is around religion. But then again why bother discussing something you don't believe in...

Also I would imagine a high percentage of posters here don't just have no belief in God, but are in fact anti-religion.

Might be good idea to rename this forum to Atheism, Agnosticism and Anti-theism maybe?

You could be right but I personally live for the day when the world is governed by secular humanists. Long live the day when I can turn on rte radio at 6 o'clock and there are no f**kin bells.

Dades

kelly1 wrote: »

It's amazing, for an Atheist/Agnostic forum how much discussion here is around religion. But then again why bother discussing something you don't believe in...

I don't believe in Moby Dick but I've no problem discussing it on the literature forum. Just because one doesn't believe gods exist doesn't change the fact that the opposite belief has a huge impact on the society we all share.

kelly1 wrote: »

Also I would imagine a high percentage of posters here don't just have no belief in God, but are in fact anti-religion.

Might be good idea to rename this forum to Atheism, Agnosticism and Anti-theism maybe?

Why not change the Christianity forum to the Christianity & Creationism forum while we're at it.

kelly1

Dades wrote: »

I don't believe in Moby Dick but I've no problem discussing it on the literature forum. Just because one doesn't believe gods exist doesn't change the fact that the opposite belief has a huge impact on the society we all share.

Why not change the Christianity forum to the Christianity & Creationism forum while we're at it.

At least Creationism is in the realm of religion. It's a legit question. Why do atheists discussion religion so much?

Dave!

kelly1 wrote: »

Why do atheists discussion religion so much?

Because it's important and pertinent? Topical? Interesting? Challenging?

This is a discussion board; most atheists don't go around chatting about how cool it is to be an athiest. If you go to a discussion board, you're going to find discussion.

If you go to an AA meeting, you might hear mention of alcohol.

Start a new thread if you want, it's off topic here

JimiTime

DaveMcG wrote: »

Because it's important and pertinent? Topical? Interesting? Challenging?

This is a discussion board; most atheists don't go around chatting about how cool it is to be an athiest. If you go to a discussion board, you're going to find discussion.

If you go to an AA meeting, you might hear mention of alcohol.

Start a new thread if you want, it's off topic here

I can't for the life of me find the 'People who don't play chess' board. Can you direct me?:p:D

Galvasean

JimiTime wrote: »

I can't for the life of me find the 'People who don't play chess' board. Can you direct me?:p:D

Yeah but people playing chess has no bearing on the lives of those who don't.

Religions on the other hand, with their persistent lobbying of Governments affect the lives of everyone regardless of faith or lack there of. Whether it be abortion referendums, school and education, gay marriage or even the intentional bringing about of the Apocalypse (now THAT effects everybody!), religions can have big implications on those who don't believe in their teachings.
I'm not American either, ergo should I just drop all interest I have in American politics because I don't live in America, even though what happens in America has a big impact on my life?

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

I can't for the life of me find the 'People who don't play chess' board

Aye, but you can find more than a few places stuffed with people who see it as their highest duty to tell all that chess is The One True Game, that you can never be truly happy playing anything else, that all draughts-players are going to spend eternity burning in a lake of sulfer and that non-games players are a pack of imperceptive pillocks who are incapable of recognising "truth", morally bereft, hell-bound, argumentative and arrogant.

N'est pas?

Galvasean

That sir, was an amazing analogy...

Sangre

I found this post on another forum...

"It's amazing, for an communist forum how much discussion here is around capitalism. But then again why bother discussing something you don't believe in...

Also I would imagine a high percentage of posters here don't just have no belief in capitalism, but are in fact anti-capitalism.

Might be good idea to rename this forum to Communism and Capitalism maybe?"

super_furry

I'd imagine the main reason is because it still impacts on their life. It's still difficult not to come in contact or be affected by the beliefs of the Catholic Church in this country and elsewhere, it's even more previlant.

Dades

JimiTime wrote: »

I can't for the life of me find the 'People who don't play chess' board. Can you direct me?:p:D

Joking aside - DaveMcG mods the Non-Drinkers forum - do you see any sense behind that group? Why don't you ask him?

Noel, I see you're up to your old tricks of asking questions, ignoring the answers, and re-asking the question.

cavedave

JimiTime
I can't for the life of me find the 'People who don't play chess' board. Can you direct me?

Oh no now you are going to kick off a holy war between the queen's side and the kings side opening zealots. Just don't get this crowd started on bishops.

I am now going to change my forum name from cave to upsidedown-climbing dave

adamd164

I reckon it's due to the number of antitheists on here (inc. myself).

Unless boards decide to set up a forum specifically for antitheists, I don't see it changing. Course, then kelly1 would just start posting in the antitheist forum asking the same stupid questions.

CerebralCortex

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Long live the day when I can turn on rte radio at 6 o'clock and there are no f**kin bells.

I disagree with but do understand ( I think ) the reason behind the bells but:

My clock radio woke me up to a full rendition of God save the queen this morning at 7am on Radio 4. I still haven't figured out why, I was too groggy to understand whatever the announcer said.

kelly1

DaveMcG wrote: »

Because it's important and pertinent? Topical? Interesting? Challenging?

This is a discussion board; most atheists don't go around chatting about how cool it is to be an athiest. If you go to a discussion board, you're going to find discussion.

You make it sound like there's no value in atheism. It's so without merit that you have to find something else to talk about and why not the very thing that you don't believe in.

CerebralCortex

Because atheism goes as far as I don't believe in god, I'm not asleep, I'm awake to the reality that I am the master of my own destiny. Now what's all these theists getting in my way!!!!

kelly1

Galvasean wrote: »

Religions on the other hand, with their persistent lobbying of Governments affect the lives of everyone regardless of faith or lack there of. Whether it be abortion referendums, school and education, gay marriage or even the intentional bringing about of the Apocalypse (now THAT effects everybody!), religions can have big implications on those who don't believe in their teachings.

Everyone has a right to contribute to the decision making processes that affect our lives. Why shouldn't someone campaign agaisnt abortion or the abolition of religious practices in schools? What's wrong with trying to halt the moral decay in society? And please don't tell me that allowing abortion is progressive or advances civilization!

super_furry wrote: »

I'd imagine the main reason is because it still impacts on their life. It's still difficult not to come in contact or be affected by the beliefs of the Catholic Church in this country and elsewhere, it's even more previlant.

I think the Church has very little impact for non-catholics really.

Dades wrote: »

Noel, I see you're up to your old tricks of asking questions, ignoring the answers, and re-asking the question.

Honestly, I'm not up to any tricks. Which question did I not answer?

kelly1

adamd164 wrote: »

Course, then kelly1 would just start posting in the antitheist forum asking the same stupid questions.

Such as?

JimiTime

Galvasean wrote: »

Yeah but people playing chess has no bearing on the lives of those who don't.

Religions on the other hand, with their persistent lobbying of Governments affect the lives of everyone regardless of faith or lack there of. Whether it be abortion referendums, school and education, gay marriage or even the intentional bringing about of the Apocalypse (now THAT effects everybody!), religions can have big implications on those who don't believe in their teachings.
I'm not American either, ergo should I just drop all interest I have in American politics because I don't live in America, even though what happens in America has a big impact on my life?

Precisely. Indeed, all of the responses to my post I expected and understand fully. In responding in such a way though, what is shown is that rather than Atheism being comparable to 'Not liking chess is a hobby' as the cliche goes, it is alot less innocuous than that, as most who seem to feel the need to label themselves as 'Atheist' also are 'Anti-Theist'. Noels point was that what is exhibited here on a regular basis is 'Anti-Theism'. So many here have said that Atheism is just a non belief in a deity. In its purist language form, I suppose they're right. In reality though, those who say 'I'm Atheist', have made a concious decision Not to believe in a deity. It indicates a thought process. It just so happens that alot of these 'Atheists' are also 'Anti Theist'. Which again goes back to Noels original point.

Tim_Murphy

You make it sound like there's no value in atheism. It's so without merit that you have to find something else to talk about and why not the very thing that you don't believe in.

The general topic of why people believe strange things is a very broad and very interesting one. One doesn't have to be religious, or indeed anti-religion by the same token, to find the topic of religion interesting.

Once somebody has come to the position of not believing in any particular diety then is there is only so much to disuss about atheism itself. As a position it's not really that interesting in and of itself, it's where you go from there is what is worth discussing.

estebancambias

kelly1 wrote: »

Everyone has a right to contribute to the decision making processes that affect our lives. Why shouldn't someone campaign agaisnt abortion or the abolition of religious practices in schools? What's wrong with trying to halt the moral decay in society? And please don't tell me that allowing abortion is progressive or advances civilization!

Interesting. I have always wondered do Atheists generally go out of their way to oppose anything the Catholic Church says?

Like, are there any Atheists here who are opposed to abortion?

*I'm sort of undecided on the issue for the record*

kelly1

JimiTime wrote: »

Precisely. Indeed, all of the responses to my post I expected and understand fully. In responding in such a way though, what is shown is that rather than Atheism being comparable to 'Not liking chess is a hobby' as the cliche goes, it is alot less innocuous than that, as most who seem to feel the need to label themselves as 'Atheist' also are 'Anti-Theist'. Noels point was that what is exhibited here on a regular basis is 'Anti-Theism'. So many here have said that Atheism is just a non belief in a deity. In its purist language form, I suppose they're right. In reality though, those who say 'I'm Atheist', have made a concious decision Not to believe in a deity. It indicates a thought process. It just so happens that alot of these 'Atheists' are also 'Anti Theist'. Which again goes back to Noels original point.

Thanks Jimi.

Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens etc are the kind of atheists that I object to. If they were pure atheists, they wouldn't go about spouting their twisted gospel of hatred for religion and God. They have no idea the damage they're doing as they mess with people's faith in God. I'll bet books like the Selfish Gene and the God Delusion has destroyed the last little bit of faith that 1000s of people had clung on to. I read about one guys who went into a clinical depression for years after reading the S.G. These guys are true anti-Christs, doing the devils work. And still they're hailed as some kind of secular messiahs! God help us!

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

What's wrong with trying to halt the moral decay in society?

Well, that's where we disagree. Contrary to millions of words of pro-decay propaganda from the church, the Daily Telegraph and vast numbers of right-wing publications, I don't think there's any significant "moral decay" happening. Rather the contrary, that people are more educated, have higher standards of living, live longer, have happier and more free lives, than has ever occurred in general society in the past.

Would you prefer to live in the past where you seem to think that "morals" were "undecayed", or would you prefer to live now?

Dades

estebancambias wrote: »

Like, are there any Atheists here who are opposed to abortion?

Replies to that question on a postcard to this thread please.
Otherwise this thread is over.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

http://www.slate.com/id/33569/entry/33571/

not me

estebancambias

Dades wrote: »

Replies to that question on a postcard to this thread please.
Otherwise this thread is over.

Thanks Dades.

I don't need a specific answer though, that thread is grand.

Dades

JimiTime wrote: »

In reality though, those who say 'I'm Atheist', have made a concious decision Not to believe in a deity.

The idea of making a conscious decision to believe something, sounds about right from a theist perspective, but less so from an atheistic one.

Tim_Murphy

If they were pure atheists, they wouldn't go about spouting their twisted gospel of hatred for religion and God.

What's a 'pure atheist'?

They have no idea the damage they're doing as they mess with people's faith in God. I'll bet books like the Selfish Gene and the God Delusion has destroyed the last little bit of faith that 1000s of people had clung on to.

You say that like it has to be a bad thing. I found many parts of TGD, and other writing by Dawkins, quite uplifting.

tbh

kelly1 wrote: »

They have no idea the damage they're doing as they mess with people's faith in God.

ha. Coming from a hardcore Catholic, that's actually pretty funny.

Latchy

I have an irish relitive who in our phone conversations tells me time and time again that she is an atheist .I have come to the conclusion that the only reason she repeatedly tells me this is because she thinks it's so cool like the way some people use to say ' this week i'm a born again hari kristna ' .

She probably wonders why i have not expressed shock and awe or shout down the phone ......WoW

JimiTime

kelly1 wrote: »

Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens etc are the kind of atheists that I object to. If they were pure atheists, they wouldn't go about spouting their twisted gospel of hatred for religion and God.

I think thats the thing. These people are Anti-Theist, rather than being just alledgedly innocuous Atheists.

They have no idea the damage they're doing as they mess with people's faith in God.

I'd differ with you here. I'd have to question the faith of those who are persuaded by these guys in the first place.

I'll bet books like the Selfish Gene and the God Delusion has destroyed the last little bit of faith that 1000s of people had clung on to.

Again, everyone has responsability for themselves. There has been, there is, and will be alot more to stumble people away from Christ. If they are stumbled so easily, you'd have to question the foundation of their faith in the first place. Also, If you take this arguement and shine it inward, there has no-doubt been alot more damage done by religious institutions themselves in this regard.

I read about one guys who went into a clinical depression for years after reading the S.G. These guys are true anti-Christs, doing the devils work.

Well, all who oppose the truth of Christ are technically 'anti-christs'.
They are doing their own work, and are responsible for that work themselves. I wouldn't pass the buck to the devil.

Galvasean

kelly1 wrote: »

Everyone has a right to contribute to the decision making processes that affect our lives. Why shouldn't someone campaign agaisnt abortion or the abolition of religious practices in schools? What's wrong with trying to halt the moral decay in society?

Of course everyone has a right to contribute to said decisions. That was my point. If the non-theists of the world simply ignored the religious folk in a 'its none of my business' sort of way, they would have to forgo taking part in matters of state. I believe its called Democracy.

kelly1 wrote: »

And please don't tell me that allowing abortion is progressive or advances civilization!

For the record I'm against abortion, with the exception of the most extreme of circumstances. I think you'll find many atheists are too. Please don't assume that just because I don't believe in your God I find it acceptable to suck the unborn out of the womb via a tube because someone forgot to wear a johnny.


How nice of you to miss my point entirely and nit-pick details. :rolleyes:

Now, hopefully Dades can get back to his roll.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

\O/
I'm an anti christ

awesome, and my parents said I'd never amount to anything

estebancambias

Latchyco- Yeah a lad in my old class was so obnoxious when it came to his Atheism. He thought he was the coolest thing since sliced bread, and made it his business if someone used like the phrase 'oh my god' to talk about how stupid the person was.

I think he stumbled across the God Delusion one weekend and then thought he was an expert on the matter(not that you have to be intelligent to not believe in God(s))

Galvasean

estebancambias wrote: »

and made it his business if someone used like the phrase 'oh my god' to talk about how stupid the person was.

His name wasn't Bender was it?

kelly1

robindch wrote: »

Well, that's where we disagree. Contrary to millions of words of pro-decay propaganda from the church, the Daily Telegraph and vast numbers of right-wing publications, I don't think there's any significant "moral decay" happening. Rather the contrary, that people are more educated, have higher standards of living, live longer, have happier and more free lives, than has ever occurred in general society in the past.

What does one's standard of living have to do with moral decay? I'm talking about the levels of violence, promiscuity, selfishness, drink/drugs etc.

robindch wrote: »

Would you prefer to live in the past where you seem to think that "morals" were "undecayed", or would you prefer to live now?

Going back to the past solves nothing, it just has a different set of problems.

estebancambias

A few lads called him that all right....I was just responding to the Liverpool Guys comment about how some people thinks its cool to be Atheist.....there was a large proportion of Atheists in the year just this guy thought he was the ****.

Galvasean

kelly1 wrote: »

What does one's standard of living have to do with moral decay? I'm talking about the levels of violence, promiscuity, selfishness, drink/drugs etc.

It all depends on your perception of morality. My granny taught Tommy Tiernen's recent appearance on Tubridy Tonight* was immoral. My old school principal taught couples holding hands was immoral.
*I personally find the fact that Tubridy has his own show immoral! :eek:

And are we really more violent/full of alcohol than our grandparents' generation? I doubt it. We just have access to better weapons. Imagine if Gengis Khan had access to nuclear bombs!!!! (I stole that last one from a book, cant remember which one)

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

it would have been cooler if khan had a space shuttle

JimiTime

Galvasean wrote: »

*I personally find the fact that Tubridy has his own show immoral! :eek:

You see, if you were in the know, you'd realise he's the 4th plague spoken about in Revelation. Just after Pat Kenny and Paris Hilton:D When Staunton is the new Moring Ireland pre4senter, start prayin'!

Galvasean

JimiTime wrote: »

You see, if you were in the know, you'd realise he's the 4th plague spoken about in Revelation. Just after Pat Kenny and Paris Hilton:D When Staunton is the new Moring Ireland pre4senter, start prayin'!

Wow, the Bible is open to all sorts of interpretation.

kelly1

estebancambias wrote: »

A few lads called him that all right....I was just responding to the Liverpool Guys comment about how some people thinks its cool to be Atheist.....there was a large proportion of Atheists in the year just this guy thought he was the ****.

There's definitely a certain fashionability about atheism and the belief that atheism is the intellectually superior position.

I think there's also a fear of admitting belief in God in order to avoid ridicule.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

kelly1 wrote: »

There's definitely a certain fashionability about atheism and the belief that atheism is the intellectually superior position.

I think there's also a fear of admitting belief in God in order to avoid ridicule.

indeed, as it should be. the same way people who think elvis is still alive are nervous about admitting that too.

robindch

kelly1 wrote: »

I'm talking about the levels of violence, promiscuity, selfishness, drink/drugs etc.

How do you know that "selfishness" was less in the past? What about the WWII, wasn't it more violent back then than now? And so what about promiscuity and booze?

kelly1 wrote: »

Going back to the past solves nothing

Well, you said that there is "moral decay". That means that you think that things were better in the past. If you don't think so, then don't use the phrase "moral decay"!

kelly1

Galvasean wrote: »

It all depends on your perception of morality.

Well that's the very point. People's perception of morality is changing rapidly. Sin is more acceptable and is actively justified.

Going back a generation or two, girls didn't go around in short skirts, with the breasts hanging out for all the world to see. "Living is sin" was seriously frowned upon. Sunday newspapers didn't look like soft porn mags. etc, etc.

Innocence really is a thing of the past.

CerebralCortex

kelly1 wrote: »

What does one's standard of living have to do with moral decay? I'm talking about the levels of violence, promiscuity, selfishness, drink/drugs etc.

Honestly do you think increased religiousness would fix this? If so which religion?
How do you define promiscuity? How do you define selfishness? My parents baptising me when I wasn't self aware was pretty selfish.

kelly1 wrote: »

Going back to the past solves nothing, it just has a different set of problems.

I'm very interested to know what kind of society you would like to see in Ireland and how it would be enforced? Care to enlighten me?

CerebralCortex

kelly1 wrote: »

Well that's the very point. People's perception of morality is changing rapidly. Sin is more acceptable and is actively justified.

Going back a generation or two, girls didn't go around in short skirts, with the breasts hanging out for all the world to see. "Living is sin" was seriously frowned upon. Sunday newspapers didn't look like soft porn mags. etc, etc.

Innocence really is a thing of the past.

Its funny. Usually in my travels its people who behave like that who sheepishly call themselves catholics. Not everyone though its gross generalisation, oh much like your original post.

estebancambias

Mordeth wrote: »

indeed, as it should be. the same way people who think elvis is still alive are nervous about admitting that too.

Whats intelligent about simply believing there is no God?

tbh

estebancambias wrote: »

Whats intelligent about simply believing there is no God?

it proves you have independent thought and don't simply follow what you've been "born" into. For example, I was at a christening on Saturday, and the priest talked about how he was "claiming" the child in God's name. Surely now if your religion is as powerful as the priest obviously thinks it is, you don't need to go around "claiming" anyone - let them find their own way. no?

kelly1

robindch wrote: »

How do you know that "selfishness" was less in the past?

That's my impression. Maybe greed is a better word.

robindch wrote: »

What about the WWII, wasn't it more violent back then than now?

Poor example. I'm talking about killings without a motive, stabbing with screwdrivers, beating with hammer for looking at someone the "wrong way" e.g. the Polish guys who were killed in Drimnagh. The gang wars between drug "Lords". We didn't have that 20 years ago. We live in a more and more violent society and you'd be blind not to see that. Actuall there is generational blindness i.e. we don't really have a view of how things have changed since the days when our parents were young. The older generation see that more clearly.

robindch wrote: »

And so what about promiscuity and booze?

You don't see a problem with that???

robindch wrote: »

Well, you said that there is "moral decay". That means that you think that things were better in the past. If you don't think so, then don't use the phrase "moral decay"!

Some things have got better but I think in general it's worse.