All this religious bashing...

pH

I do kind of get it, the religious sometimes genuinely don't see what the problem is, and complain about an "atheist" over reaction.

And just when I'm thinking they may well have a point ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7h08RDYA5E

This isn't a random nutjob on youtube, this is an elected US official, last month at a congressional sub-committee hearing on the environment.

Oh and keep an eye on the woman behind representative Shimkus - priceless

sink

pH wrote: »

I do kind of get it, the religious sometimes genuinely don't see what the problem is, and complain about an "atheist" over reaction.

And just when I'm thinking they may well have a point ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7h08RDYA5E

This isn't a random nutjob on youtube, this is an elected US official, last month at a congressional sub-committee hearing on the environment.

Oh and keep an eye on the woman behind representative Shimkus - priceless

It's almost too scary to even laugh at that. Shimkus, probably best case for anti-theism in the world.

thebouldwhacker

wow:eek:... what do you say to that??

That is hardcore stuff!

Anyone else see the lady (;)) in the back? she can only fight to stop laughing!

Still, that is not good! would he have the same argument for using a nuke? 'hey it dont matter, god said its cool'

sink

It gets worse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdHjhJTf6RE

He references CO2 levels in the Cambrian period, at that time there were no land plants just microbial life forms such as fungus.

fitz0

pH wrote: »

I do kind of get it, the religious sometimes genuinely don't see what the problem is, and complain about an "atheist" over reaction.

And just when I'm thinking they may well have a point ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7h08RDYA5E

This isn't a random nutjob on youtube, this is an elected US official, last month at a congressional sub-committee hearing on the environment.

Oh and keep an eye on the woman behind representative Shimkus - priceless

"There is a theological debate that this is a carbon starved planet."

Seriously wtf?

He quotes Genesis and then talks about dinosaurs? Surely if he uses biblical anecdotes as evidence he believes them, so how then does he reconcile belief in Genesis as being the "infallible, perfect word of god" with the existance of dinosaurs about 64,994,000 years before the earth was magicked into existance?

Why do people elect these idiots?

Zamboni

I'd have no beef with the religious if I truly lived in a secular country.

Goduznt Xzst

fitz0 wrote: »

Why do people elect these idiots?

because the idiotic people have the majority, so of course they'll elect one of their own.

Seriously, Carbon Starved? WTF? If it wasn't for the evolution of land plants that absorb CO2 and poop oxygen the world we have today wouldn't exist, it definitely wouldn't accommodate Humans or any other large land mammals. As far as I'm aware, around the end of the Cambrian, every animal breathed oxygen, but there where very few processes that actually created it, like photodissociation of water (only producing oxygen if the hydrogen released escaped the atmosphere). I don't doubt you could starve the earth of CO2, but comparing the Earth we have now to the Cambrian period is utterly farcical.

Ickle Magoo

Húrin wrote: »

You were surely aware that Ireland was a less secular culture than Britain before you moved here.

I was aware it was less secular, yes. Quite how much less a rather unpleasant surprise - even for my Irish spouse who moved back here.

Húrin

fitz0 wrote: »

If nobody showed creationism as a fairytale theres the danger that some eejits might actually believe it! With the amount of people in power that actually believe it there's no room for complacency. Even with evidence that the world isn't 6000 years old some tools are still trying to push their "God did it" tripe into schools and homes. If atheists just let them do this unopposed it would be a sad day for the human race.

Christians who don't believe evolution are a minority, as are politicians. We have scientists to keep us up to date on biological history. "Atheists" don't actually need to oppose creationism. The atheist polemicists make anti-creationism into a doctrine to affirm their own beliefs, according to Overblood's logic:

the criticism of religion would not be offensive to the Christians if they truly believed in god and the church and the bible etc.

Would you accept a Christian saying that they cannot just ignore criticism on the grounds that it blinds people to the truth?

Botany Bay wrote: »

Your precious beliefs don't deserve any respect. Religious beliefs have done nothing to earn such an accolade. While their presence in previous millenia and centuries can be forgiven for the collective primitiveness and ignorance. The continued presence of religious belief in 21st century Western Society is nothing short of embarrassing and pathetic. You can't accept criticism or ridicule, red_ice??? Tough!!!

The irrationality and pure lunacy of religious belief demands castigation and ridicule.

You were going well until this part, when you just degenerate into a fanatical rant. What's so special about 21st century Western Society? To assert that there is sounds rather imperialist.

sink wrote: »

It's almost too scary to even laugh at that. Shimkus, probably best case for anti-theism in the world.

His problems come not from his religion, but from his lazy misunderstanding of what climate scientists are saying. They are not saying that the world will end; he assumes they are. Plenty of deniers who are not religious think that scientists are saying this, and plenty of religious people accept the reality of climate change. It's more a matter of being unable to convince a man of something if his income depends on not understanding it.

fitz0 wrote: »

He quotes Genesis and then talks about dinosaurs? Surely if he uses biblical anecdotes as evidence he believes them, so how then does he reconcile belief in Genesis as being the "infallible, perfect word of god" with the existance of dinosaurs about 64,994,000 years before the earth was magicked into existance?

Why do people elect these idiots?

Genesis does not say that the world was created 6,000 years ago. That belief only came into existence about 400 years ago, thanks to one of the heads at Trinity!

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I was aware it was less secular, yes. Quite how much less a rather unpleasant surprise - even for my Irish spouse who moved back here.

Do you live in a rural area? Dublin is more secular. Either way, when in Rome...

sink

Húrin wrote: »

His problems come not from his religion, but from his lazy misunderstanding of what climate scientists are saying. They are not saying that the world will end; he assumes they are. Plenty of deniers who are not religious think that scientists are saying this, and plenty of religious people accept the reality of climate change. It's more a matter of being unable to convince a man of something if his income depends on not understanding it.

That is a fair point, but what I really find scary is that he decides to turn to the authority of the bible to refute scientists. I never expected to see that in a developed western democracy. Tbh I don't think anti-theism and attacking religion is going to be anyway effective at combating fundamentalism. Moderate atheists and theists need to team up against this kind of blind unthinking fundamentalism.

Fanny Cradock

sink wrote: »

That is a fair point, but what I really find scary is that he decides to turn to the authority of the bible to refute scientists. I never expected to see that in a developed western democracy. Tbh I don't think anti-theism and attacking religion is going to be anyway effective at combating fundamentalism. Moderate atheists and theists need to team up against this kind of blind unthinking fundamentalism.

Well, that is fair enough, but it becomes very difficult when the polarised opinions at the far right and far left of belief and non-belief, in a brief moment of unity, inform us that religion and science are at each others throats .

sink

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Well, that is fair enough, but it becomes very difficult when the polarised opinions at the far right and far left of belief and non-belief, in a brief moment of unity, inform us that religion and science are at each others throats .

I would say the majority of atheist think that science contradicts religion, it is one of the main reasons for believing what we do, it doesn't mean we're on the extreme side of atheism. One of the Christian beliefs held even by moderates is that all who don't believe in Jesus are destined to suffer greatly, although I find this somewhat offensive I have long ago built a bridge and gotten over it. You should do the same in regards to atheists views on science and religion. Just because we disagree on a few details doesn't mean we can't agree on anything else and doesn't mean we can't work together on shared goals.

JC 2K3

Yes, there is too much Christian bashing on here. I often wonder why there's so much focus on proving the Bible to be immoral or that specific aspects of Christianity are absurd, when really it all should be nullified by the fact that we don't believe in anything supernatural to begin with...

You get the occasional unique, interesting thread on here, but they're few and far between these days.

dvpower

lightening wrote: »

Do we have to be so anti-religious? Does anyone feel we can live and let live.

Absolutely. First stop - separation of church and state.

Helix

Húrin wrote: »

Would you accept a Christian saying that they cannot just ignore criticism on the grounds that it blinds people to the truth?

would you accept an atheist saying that they cannot just ignore religion on the grounds that it blinds people to the truth?

Ickle Magoo

Húrin wrote: »

Do you live in a rural area? Dublin is more secular. Either way, when in Rome...

I may have less right to demand change in Ireland as I'm not Irish but my husband who is Irish born and raised (in that hub of secularism, Dublin, lol), his family who also don't like the status quo even as traditional Irish Catholics and 99.9% of the atheists on this forum shouldn't have to just lump it because it suits some & historically has always been that way.

Thank goodness society doesn't work that way or we'd still be living with all manner of other archaic impingements, too.