Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

tommy2bad

'it is like not claiming I can show smoking caused lung cancer. All I can do is show smokers in history had a much higher instance.

Here you go again.. Yes you can show smoking causes cancer their is a cause and effect chain, it's not just a high coincidence.

Theists don''t claim anything is justified.

I never said they did, I said they see the other side as failing because they think the other side can be defined by the terms that their side use, and I applied it to both sides.

The Quadratic Equation

marienbad wrote: »

Well ISAW if you keep repeating the same rubrics over and over again and never adding anything new I suppose you will eventually convince yourself even if you convince no one else.

Unlike those opposing his points, ISAW backs his arguments up with facts. You however, other than sniping, seem to be unwilling and unable to provide anything factual to support your opinions.

tommy2bad

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

Unlike those opposing his points, ISAW backs his arguments up with facts. You however, other than sniping, seem to be unwilling and unable to provide anything factual to support your opinions.

What and litter the thread with cut n past wikie links?
Facts to back up his argument would help if he posted any instead he keeps posting more and more stats that seem to point to something but without any cause and effect mechanism to support his opinion.
In fairness he dose concede that all his opinions are drawn from inference and co relational statistics. He doesn't claim to be able to prove anything and admits it just a conclusion he has drawn.
We have been trying to get him to admit that atheism on its own cant be held responsible for anything anymore than Christianity can.
Their seem to be some problem defining atheism and Christianity, then a problem attributing anything to anything else. This is the internet; discussions get stuck in an infinity loop from time to time.
I had hoped could discuss whether anything inherent in atheism or christianity could lead to genocide but instead we are on a merry go round of "but thats not what I said" even I've done it.

ISAW

Morbert wrote: »

Define: "Bring their atheism to bear on policy".

Do you believe atheism is a "better way" for society? People who believe that and take part in policy making are bringing their atheism to bear on policy.

Do you believe the secular principle that no religion should be oppressed or established by the state is bringing atheism to bear on policy?

Yes if it is done with a belief that "atheism is a better way". The is no established religion in the Republic of Ireland. But the constitution supports peoples right to have their children in ethos schools. Any attack on this by an atheist who believes atheism is better for society is bringing atheism to bear on policy.

Now, as a follow up question: Do you believe Japan, a predominantly atheist society, but not an atheist regime, is on the road to atrocity?

Japan is not an atheistic society. It is a secular democracy.

But I suppose you also believe a lie asserted over and over begins to sound like the truth.

What like "atheism is a better way" ? You do believe that don't you?

No they aren't. Japan can be described as atheistic in the sense that most of the people are atheistic.

Nice try at redefining my own definition. atheistic = atheism and atheist principle of "there is no god" as a central principle of society.
Most people in Japan don't want "there is no God" enshrined in law or the constitution or even accepted on a societal level. They are happy to allow others to believe in spirits souls God or gods without attacking such people.

You just repeated the same mistake you made last time, only you used more words, and contradictory definitions (Do you believe a person is Lutheran if they don't believe in God?). Those surveys are completely consistent with the cartoon if we define an atheist as someone who doesn't believe in God or gods.

The country is almost entirely Lutheran and NOT atheist.

Of the rest the numbers of other christian denominations and religions rival atheism and are growing faster than atheism.

You may not have heard of the Reformation or the Thirty Years War or Luther or Gustavo Adolphus? Lutheranism is arguably the fourth largest denomination of core Christianity after Roman Orthodox and Anglican. Indeed maybe the third largest if you consider Anglicans are fractured into several loose groups. Lutherans have core beliefs and number in the tens of millions at the very least. To redefine Scandinavian Lutherans as "atheist" is preposterous!
The cartoon may be funny but it is factually wrong!

ISAW

tommy2bad wrote: »

What and litter the thread with cut n past wikie links?

And links to the Norweegian central stastics office?
And links to the Eurostat official EU statistics surveys?
And links to Gallup- an internationally recognised pollster?

Facts to back up his argument would help if he posted any instead he keeps posting more and more stats that seem to point to something but without any cause and effect mechanism to support his opinion.

Norway is not atheist! The published facts don't support the contention that it is!

As regards a formal proof of "atheism caused atrocities" i have already pointed out what is meant by deductive and inductive reasoning. I have posted the actual historical facts of deaths under atheistic regimes and the atheistic pronouncements made by people in such regimes or on which such regimes were based.

the cause and effect mechanism is not the only what of accepting the argument nor is it absolutely necessary.

Cancer was accepted as caused by smoking without such a mechanism in spite of the atheistic smoking lobby who said they did not believe it.
Cholera was statistically shown to be related to water sources being close to sewers in spite of the science of microbiology and germs not being in existence.

In fairness he dose concede that all his opinions are drawn from inference and co relational statistics.

Not all my opinions.

He doesn't claim to be able to prove anything and admits it just a conclusion he has drawn.

Formally and logically prove this one example by deduction.
I can inductively prove it

We have been trying to get him to admit that atheism on its own cant be held responsible for anything anymore than Christianity can.

Atheism can't formally but it is NOT the same for Christianity which has an entirely different historical record!

Their seem to be some problem defining atheism and Christianity,

No problem at all! I already gave the definitions I use.

I had hoped could discuss whether anything inherent in atheism or christianity could lead to genocide

Well "love your neighbour treat them as you would like them to treat you ( assuming you are not a masochist and believe you would like to be treated in a 'good and righteous' manner) and forgive them" is a central belief of Christianity. and "there is no God and no such thing as objective morality" is central to atheism.

I think it is obvious which belief might more likely lead to genocide don't you. Hint: Look at whatever governments instituted such beliefs in history.

marienbad

ISAW, it is easy to prove anything to your own satisfaction when you make up your own definitions along the way.

For instance I can make a case, imitating your line of reasoning , that whenever you have a catholic power structure massive sexual abuse is inevitable.It has happened everytime.

When using your own definitions of atheism /atheistic society/ totalitatian society ,you can prove anything. Try using recognised definitions and see how far you will get.

Catholicism= Sexual abuse, see Ireland Belgium Germany South America Boston Los Angeles Chicago etc . Roemer- Ledwith-Smyth-Vangheluwe-Degellado etc- . Inductively deductively whatever ,the case seems to be proven , don't you think - certainly using your methodology.

Morbert

ISAW wrote: »

Do you believe atheism is a "better way" for society? People who believe that and take part in policy making are bringing their atheism to bear on policy.

Yes if it is done with a belief that "atheism is a better way". The is no established religion in the Republic of Ireland. But the constitution supports peoples right to have their children in ethos schools. Any attack on this by an atheist who believes atheism is better for society is bringing atheism to bear on policy.

Japan is not an atheistic society. It is a secular democracy.

What like "atheism is a better way" ? You do believe that don't you?

Nice try at redefining my own definition. atheistic = atheism and atheist principle of "there is no god" as a central principle of society.
Most people in Japan don't want "there is no God" enshrined in law or the constitution or even accepted on a societal level. They are happy to allow others to believe in spirits souls God or gods without attacking such people.

You are pettifogging. Would you please "clarify" your position. Do you believe a predominantly atheist society (I.e. A society predominantly consisting of atheists, like Japan) is on the road to atrocity?

The country is almost entirely Lutheran and NOT atheist.

Of the rest the numbers of other christian denominations and religions rival atheism and are growing faster than atheism.

You may not have heard of the Reformation or the Thirty Years War or Luther or Gustavo Adolphus? Lutheranism is arguably the fourth largest denomination of core Christianity after Roman Orthodox and Anglican. Indeed maybe the third largest if you consider Anglicans are fractured into several loose groups. Lutherans have core beliefs and number in the tens of millions at the very least. To redefine Scandinavian Lutherans as "atheist" is preposterous!
The cartoon may be funny but it is factually wrong!

You are saying making the same mistake again:"All Norwegians are automatically registered as members at birth, so this number includes anyone except members of other communities, and those few who take action to unregister."

By your logic I am still a Congregationalist. When, instead, the society is demarcated based on whether or not they believe in God/gods, atheists are the majority.

ISAW

marienbad wrote: »

ISAW, it is easy to prove anything to your own satisfaction when you make up your own definitions along the way.

And if that is what I was doing you night have a point. BUT
1. I supplied the definition FIRST . I didn't make it up along the way.

2. It is a generally accepted one . It ( atheism = "there is no God" ) has been proffered by several atheists in this forum and elsewhere. It has also been supported by reference to dictionaries etc.

For instance I can make a case, imitating your line of reasoning , that whenever you have a catholic power structure massive sexual abuse is inevitable.It has happened everytime.

Really? considering I am not aware of it ( massive sexual abuse) EVER happening within the Catholic Church or within any structure controlled by the Catholic Church I am waiting with interest for your support for this contention.

When using your own definitions of atheism /atheistic society/ totalitatian society ,you can prove anything. Try using recognised definitions and see how far you will get.

Try paying attention.
I gave my definition.
Atheists happen to agree that the definition is correct.
It also corresponds with dictionary definitions.

Catholicism= Sexual abuse, see Ireland Belgium Germany South America Boston Los Angeles Chicago etc .

Nonsense. For example at least 3 million Irish people are Catholic. ther are not three million sexual abusers in Ireland. To equate abuse ( and we are focused on pedophile child sex abuse in particular) with Catholics you would have to show that the ratio of abusers who are catholic is at least of the same level as the ratio of society which is Catholic.

Similarly if 1% of society is atheist you would expect 1% of abusers to be atheist. I have no idea what percentage of abusers are atheist. and again if there is a larger than expected percentage it does not prove being Catholic or being atheist causes pedophile abuse but one might have suspicions.

Roemer- Ledwith-Smyth-Vangheluwe-Degellado etc- . Inductively deductively whatever ,the case seems to be proven , don't you think - certainly using your methodology.

I don't think I can "prove anything" in the way you are suggesting no.
You may well think I am defining "atheist" or "Catholic" in some way which prevents them being abusers or defines them as abusers but you fail to prove what you think is actually true.

ISAW

Morbert wrote: »

You are pettifogging. Would you please "clarify" your position. Do you believe a predominantly atheist society (I.e. A society predominantly consisting of atheists, like Japan) is on the road to atrocity?

Not if they do not adopt atheism as a guiding principle for society. If on the other hand they adopt atheistic government yes I would think they are going down that road ( based on the evidence that whenever this was done that is exactly what happened).

Let me ask you a similar but much stronger question Do you believe a predominantly Christian society which goes further than that and actually puts the Church or clergy into political positions of power is on the road to atrocity? Do you think atheism is a better way for society to go?

You are saying making the same mistake again:"All Norwegians are automatically registered as members at birth, so this number includes anyone except members of other communities, and those few who take action to unregister."

You are spouting nonsense. You can't claim Norway a Lutheran country is atheist! Humanism ( which itself is not all hard line atheist) in Norway is dwarfed by Islam , Catholics and other Christian denominations whioch are growing much faster than atheism and that is leaving aside the massive Lutheran Majority. You just can't claim Lutherans are atheist. That is a complete joke!
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_225_report_en.pdf
Page 9:

Which of these statements comes closest to your beliefs?
I believe there is a God
I believe there is some sort of spirit or life force
I don’ t believe there is any sort of spirit, God or life force = atheism
Don't know K

Norway =17% atheist by this poll in 2005

By your logic I am still a Congregationalist. When, instead, the society is demarcated based on whether or not they believe in God/gods, atheists are the majority.

By Eurostat research Norway is 17% atheist not over 90% as you fallaciously claim!
the research is supported by Gallup and various other sources.
Please take your nonsense hand-waving cartoon arguments elsewhere.

marienbad

ISAW wrote: »

And if that is what I was doing you night have a point. BUT
1. I supplied the definition FIRST . I didn't make it up along the way.

2. It is a generally accepted one . It ( atheism = "there is no God" ) has been proffered by several atheists in this forum and elsewhere. It has also been supported by reference to dictionaries etc.



Really? considering I am not aware of it ( massive sexual abuse) EVER happening within the Catholic Church or within any structure controlled by the Catholic Church I am waiting with interest for your support for this contention.



Try paying attention.
I gave my definition.
Atheists happen to agree that the definition is correct.
It also corresponds with dictionary definitions.



Nonsense. For example at least 3 million Irish people are Catholic. ther are not three million sexual abusers in Ireland. To equate abuse ( and we are focused on pedophile child sex abuse in particular) with Catholics you would have to show that the ratio of abusers who are catholic is at least of the same level as the ratio of society which is Catholic.

Similarly if 1% of society is atheist you would expect 1% of abusers to be atheist. I have no idea what percentage of abusers are atheist. and again if there is a larger than expected percentage it does not prove being Catholic or being atheist causes pedophile abuse but one might have suspicions.



I don't think I can "prove anything" in the way you are suggesting no.
You may well think I am defining "atheist" or "Catholic" in some way which prevents them being abusers or defines them as abusers but you fail to prove what you think is actually true.

No you dont define atheism like others do ISAW - if you did your house of cards would fall down .

What is you definition of totalitarianism ? Or are you afraid to give one for fear of weakening your argument ?

marienbad

ISAW do I detect a fundamentally anti democratic tilt to your recents posts vis-a vis atheists and political power ? In the sense that it is fine to be atheists in private so long as it is not introduced into the public sphere ?

Morbert

ISAW wrote: »

Not if they do not adopt atheism as a guiding principle for society. If on the other hand they adopt atheistic government yes I would think they are going down that road ( based on the evidence that whenever this was done that is exactly what happened).

So the answer is no. Therefore, would you agree with the statement "Atheism, per se, does not cause atrocities"?

Let me ask you a similar but much stronger question Do you believe a predominantly Christian society which goes further than that and actually puts the Church or clergy into political positions of power is on the road to atrocity? Do you think atheism is a better way for society to go?

To the first question: no. I have been clear about this. Ireland did not commit mass genocide when the Church had significant political power. I do believe, however, that societies flourish when governmental policies do not establish or oppress religious values.

The second question is too vague: When Quinn said "the significant societal changes that have taken place in Ireland in recent years have led to an increased demand for new forms of multi-denominational and non-denominational schooling as well as increased demand for Irish language schooling. There are real questions to be answered about the match between our type of school provision, the demand for greater diversity and the make-up of the communities which need to be served.", do you interpret that as "the atheist way"?

You are spouting nonsense. You can't claim Norway a Lutheran country is atheist! Humanism ( which itself is not all hard line atheist) in Norway is dwarfed by Islam , Catholics and other Christian denominations whioch are growing much faster than atheism and that is leaving aside the massive Lutheran Majority. You just can't claim Lutherans are atheist. That is a complete joke!
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_225_report_en.pdf
Page 9:

Norway =17% atheist by this poll in 2005

By Eurostat research Norway is 17% atheist not over 90% as you fallaciously claim!
the research is supported by Gallup and various other sources.
Please take your nonsense hand-waving cartoon arguments elsewhere.

You are making the same 2 mistake over and over: 1) That "membership" of the Lutheran Church indicates they are a Christian. 2) That only materialist gnostics are true atheists. According to you, I am a non-atheist Congregationalist. Talk about "fudging" facts to suit your agenda.

Section 1.2 of the poll, Q2: Which of these statements comes closest to your beliefs?

Only 32% said "There is a God" comes closest to their beliefs. The rest either purely materialists, or believed in some spiritual life-force. It is as plain as day.

ISAW

MagicSean wrote: »

There is a big difference between a social worker not checking up on a child in care and a priest buggering a young boy.

So what? What is your point ? Is there a no difference between a priest not checking up on a child in care and a social worker buggering a young boy who later is found dead?

One is an action and the other is an inaction. The HSE may be accused of failing to prevent a death ot injury to a child in care but in the case of clerical abuse is direct.

And the church could be accused of syatematic abuse and not having the enough procedures and policies in the past but the case of social worker or parental or swimming instructor or any other non clerical direct abuse is direct. Don't forget of 100 child sex abusers 99 of them are NOT clergy.

The state are limitied in what they can do. They can't lock up children to prevent them hanging out with the wrong people and getting in trouble. In most cases these children are severely damaged before coming into care. In the case of clerical abuse the damage was caused while they were in care and caused by their carers directly.

That isn't true either. Given 99% or abusers were non clerical most of the people doing the direct damage were non clerics. Yo just single out clerics with the usual "clerical abuse" filter. We can dod the same for "HSE abuse" except in the case of the HSE the level of actual death is much much worse.

The management in many cases ignored what was going on when they could have taken action.

I agree.
Apparently this is true of the HSE since over 200 died over the last ten years.

Not really. I think that maybe you don't understand the type of child or the number of children that go into care and how damaged they often are before they enter, often at the hands of their own parents.

funny how you seem to forget this when it comes to historic Church run institutions isn't it?

The reason there is so much more focus on clerics is that it was such a greater betrayal of trust as well. Priests in particular were given such a high standing and when some of them betrayed this trust it sent shockwaves.

Indeed it did. But why should that apply today when the policy has changed and clerics not alone dont but can abuse and when over 200 die in HSE care. why are you still discussing the 1% of abusers from decades ago and focusing on them?

The denial and coverup by the church authorities compounded this mistrust and caused it to spread. The spin is of their own doing.

No it is of YOUR doing. Why? - Because the church didnt cover up. Only in a few very rare cases ( maybe a dozen in hundreds of sex abuse cases over a century ) did maybe a handfull of church management ( ten or twenty bishops of maybe 100,000) cover up anything and even then this was not in consultation with each other but by the management acting independently of one another.

What other kind of abuse is there?

In terms of Sexual abuse - Ephebophilia; and adult sexual abuse and harassement.
Then there is physical abuse and emotional abuse and neglect.

You're very selective with your figures. It's admirable really.

I resent you accusing me of being either sly or dishonest.

You refer to priests when you want the figure to be low but to clerical abuse when you want it to be more vague.

I'd suggest you look at my posting record. Even though Roman Priests are a huge majority of Christian clergy the amounts of RCC priests who were sexual abusers is half or less. Other denominations are higher and ther is also evidence of Rabbi's. But I don't want to get into a Protestant versus Catholic debate when adding them all together they are minor ( and I mean a hundred times less minor) when the issue of the other 99% is being ignored.

My own local priest was moved to another parish after being reported where he went on to abuse again so I think I will go by what I have seen rather than what the vatican reports.

and the General's wife knew a load of criminals. You can't seriously think that everyone should base objective arguments on your opinion and your personal experience can you?

The practice of dealing with it in-house prevented any kind of accurate records being kept at the time

What do you mean "in house" ? either the Vatican knew or it ddint. If you are claiming it didn't then you cant also claim it did and it hid it? That is your whole point destroyed!

but at the end of the day if abuse was reported to a bishop it should have been passed to the Gardaí. It was not the choice of the church to make.

the church policy is to obey the local law. If the local law said pass it to the Gardai then that is the policy. as I stated rarely if at all was such a policy ignored soully by the church. In some instances for example a senior garda was contacted by a Bishop and stated it need not be reported locally. In some cases civil servants in the Department of Justice lost paperwork. In very few cases bishops knew about cases and hid them.

As that particular case is an ongoing criminal investigation I'm sure it will be revealed after it's complete.

We will leave it sub judice then. Bu if so it isnt evidence of anything it is just an unsupported claim until we can look at the court findings.

tommy2bad

Only 32% said "There is a God" comes closest to their beliefs. The rest either purely materialists, or believed in some spiritual life-force. It is as plain as day.

Oh if only it were!
I don't think an atheist society as defined by ISAW has ever existed out side the examples he gives because he defines atheist as anti theist. ISAW demands that the indifferent atheist doesn't count as an atheist. He refuses to accept that a secular society is as much the result of atheism as it is of humanism and Christianity.
Yes its hard to separate any western democracy from its Christian roots but at some point we have to accept that what we do now is because we choose to do it. Belief in god some and non belief of others combine ans evolve together to create a society that accommodates all. the percentage atheist or non atheist isn't relevant to how that society turns out. The adherence to some idealogical position that discounts the rights of others is what leads to genocide. Christians and Jews and Islam and atheist and probably tree worshiping druids have all gone down that road.
Please, ISAW don't start the league tables again, their not relevant to this discussion unless you are claiming that Christianity is the lesser or two evils.

ISAW

Morbert wrote: »

So the answer is no. Therefore, would you agree with the statement "Atheism, per se, does not cause atrocities"?

If you can say for example "nazism per se does not cause atrocities" I'm sure one can apply the same to atheism.

To the first question: no. I have been clear about this. Ireland did not commit mass genocide when the Church had significant political power. I do believe, however, that societies flourish when governmental policies do not establish or oppress religious values.

The Byzantine Empire flourished for 1500 years or so and it was wholly linked to the church.

The second question is too vague: When Quinn said "the significant societal changes that have taken place in Ireland in recent years have led to an increased demand for new forms of multi-denominational and non-denominational schooling as well as increased demand for Irish language schooling. There are real questions to be answered about the match between our type of school provision, the demand for greater diversity and the make-up of the communities which need to be served.", do you interpret that as "the atheist way"?

No I interpret "lets start by getting rid of 50% of ethos schools" as an anti family anti church atheists together way.

You are making the same 2 mistake over and over: 1) That "membership" of the Lutheran Church indicates they are a Christian.

NO! YOU are making the mistake that it indicates they are atheist! They arent! that is supported by Gallup, Eurostat and other souorces. Norway is not 80% atheist as you like to claim! It is not anywhere near 80% or 90%. It might be near 15%

2) That only materialist gnostics are true atheists. According to you, I am a non-atheist Congregationalist. Talk about "fudging" facts to suit your agenda.

No fudge

Eurostat and the Nones study in the Us have been given atheism is "there is no God or gods or supernaturall beings". It is a broadly accepted definition.

Agnostics are not the same but in any case are still a tiny percentage ( about the same as atheists).

Fasgnadh the frequent alt.atheism poster is an agnostic for example. You claim to be of one belief with Fasgnadh?

Section 1.2 of the poll, Q2: Which of these statements comes closest to your beliefs?

Only 32% said "There is a God" comes closest to their beliefs.

Atheism = There is no god or gods
Pagans, agnostics, pantheists, spiritualists, anamists, shamanists, voodoo spiritualists etc. are NOT atheist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
32 % - Belief in God =NOT atheist
47% belief in a spirit opr life force - NOT atheist
17% there is no god/spirits - atheist!

Thats 17% NOT 77 NOT 87!
got it?

The rest either purely materialists, or believed in some spiritual life-force. It is as plain as day.

So what. I'm not arguing about who believed in god. I'm saying it is NOT NOT NOT a majority atheist country and certainly not anywhere near 80% as you falsely claimed!
It is cartoon statistics you are using.

tommy2bad

Atheism = There is no god or gods
Pagans, agnostics, pantheists, spiritualists, anamists, shamanists, voodoo spiritualists etc. are NOT atheist.

Ah right so when you claimed that only Christianity versus atheism was what concerned you.....?

Morbert

ISAW wrote: »

If you can say for example "nazism per se does not cause atrocities" I'm sure one can apply the same to atheism.

Nazi-ism does directly cause atrocities though. Its guiding principles embrace genocide. Atheism has no guiding principles. A Nazi can be an atheist, just as a pacifist, pluralist humanist can be an atheist.

The Byzantine Empire flourished for 1500 years or so and it was wholly linked to the church.

And?

No I interpret "lets start by getting rid of 50% of ethos schools" as an anti family anti church atheists together way.

I cannot find that quote. Are you making things up again?

NO! YOU are making the mistake that it indicates they are atheist!

You are making the mistake that Christianity is run by purple bunnies who grow on trees made of marshmallows, grown by a talking moose who has a mild case of Alektorophobia.

They arent! that is supported by Gallup, Eurostat and other souorces. Norway is not 80% atheist as you like to claim! It is not anywhere near 80% or 90%. It might be near 15%

No fudge

Eurostat and the Nones study in the Us have been given atheism is "there is no God or gods or supernaturall beings". It is a broadly accepted definition.

Agnostics are not the same but in any case are still a tiny percentage ( about the same as atheists).

Fasgnadh the frequent alt.atheism poster is an agnostic for example. You claim to be of one belief with Fasgnadh?

Atheism = There is no god or gods
Pagans, agnostics, pantheists, spiritualists, anamists, shamanists, voodoo spiritualists etc. are NOT atheist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
32 % - Belief in God =NOT atheist
47% belief in a spirit opr life force - NOT atheist
17% there is no god/spirits - atheist!

Thats 17% NOT 77 NOT 87!
got it?

So what. I'm not arguing about who believed in god. I'm saying it is NOT NOT NOT a majority atheist country and certainly not anywhere near 80% as you falsely claimed!
It is cartoon statistics you are using.

First I apparently claimed it was 90%. Now I claimed it was 80% apparently. (I actually claimed it was 70%, which is true). It is Euro-barometer statistics I am using.

Buddhists believe in a life force. Plenty of atheists believe in Ghosts and spirits. Plenty of atheists (including me) are agnostics when it comes to knowledge of God. Are we all "NOT atheists"?

But two can play the definition game: There was only ONE Christian in the entire world. To qualify as a Christian, you have to be King of Belgium, and be ok with killing millions.

ISAW

tommy2bad wrote: »

Ah right so when you claimed that only Christianity versus atheism was what concerned you.....?

Yes in terms of evidence in history of running a State.

But when it is an argument about a cartoon which makes a specific claim that Norway is an atheist country with a massive atheist majority run by atheists as opposed to an atheist minority in a country where the Church is constitutionally linked to and part of the power structure of the state then that is a different matter.

ISAW

Morbert wrote: »

Nazi-ism does directly cause atrocities though. Its guiding principles embrace genocide.

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

Initially Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, though such aspects were later downplayed in the 1930s to gain the support from industrial owners for the Nazis; focus was shifted to anti-Semitic and anti-Marxist themes

So the principles were first announced without mentioning Jews religion or Marxists.

A but like announcing "we are only interested in secularism" to " we need to remove the Church from Schools" to "out with God in with atheism"

Nazism advocated the supremacy of the supposed Aryan master race over all other races

I have asked you several;; times and you have not answered. Do you regard atheism as a better way for society? Do you think the world would be better off iof religious belief was replaced by atheism? In the sort of country you pretend Norway to be?

Atheism has no guiding principles.

It is the idea that there is no God. Do you think the would would be more preferable if people believed that?

I cannot find that quote. Are you making things up again?

Again? You are accusing me of lying before?
This took me about 30 seconds to find:
http://www.irishcatholic.ie/site/content/pluralism-and-patronage-primary-schools-rory-fitzgerald
" the bishops said Minister Quinn's suggestions that 50 percent of primary schools be divested was ''very unhelpful''.

Maybe you think the Irish Catholic are Lying too?

How about the Ministers own press office?
Another 30 seconds
http://www.education.ie/home/home.jsp?maincat=&pcategory=10861&ecategory=11469&sectionpage=12251&language=EN&link=link001&page=2&doc=52836

the percentage of the population who actively want a Catholic education could be as low as 50%....
t is probable that, over time, around 50% of primary school children will be in primary schools under patronage arrangements other than those of the Churches

Still think I'm lying?
Unlike your cartoon majority of Norway being atheist I don't make up figures.
I certain don't try to defend something when the evidence is there showing comic book argument is just that - laughable. As I stated funny but not actually true. Please don't claim I ever try to be deliberately dishonest with any statistics ever. Doing so undermines academic credibility but I would not do it because it isn't morally acceptable. But of course since morals are meaningless to you I don't expect you to understand that.

You are making the mistake that Christianity is run by purple bunnies who grow on trees made of marshmallows, grown by a talking moose who has a mild case of Alektorophobia.

Norway is not atheist and no matter how many mushrooms you seem to have consumed it will not become atheist just because you want to believe it is!

First I apparently claimed it was 90%. Now I claimed it was 80% apparently. (I actually claimed it was 70%, which is true). It is Euro-barometer statistics I am using.

I claimed it is about 90% Lutheran. It is no way 70% atheist!
Gallup/Eurostat etc. say it isnt.

But according to you only 13 of the 33 Eu countries are not atheist. 20 European countries are atheist according to you based on your reasoning of the " I believe ther is a God" answer being in a minority.The results reveal some principal tendencies. The first being that there is seemingly a
move away from religion in its traditional form - “I believe there is a God” - which
seems to affect the Protestant countries, such as the Netherlands, Denmark and
Sweden, as well as countries with a strong secular tradition such as France and
Belgium. At the same time there is an affirmation of traditional religious beliefs in
countries where the Church or Religious Institutions have been historically strong,
notably, Greece, Cyprus, Portugal and Ireland. In certain Eastern European countries,
in spite of 40 or 50 years of communism, a strong attachment to religion emerges in
Catholic countries such as Poland, Croatia and Slovakia. The third tendency is the
development of a new kind of religion characterised by the belief that “there is some
sort of spirit or life force”. This new religion or spirituality is more marked in certain
Protestant countries, such as Sweden or Denmark as well as in the Czech Republic and
Estonia.

ISAW

Morbert wrote: »

Buddhists believe in a life force. Plenty of atheists believe in Ghosts and spirits. Plenty of atheists (including me) are agnostics when it comes to knowledge of God. Are we all "NOT atheists"?

Correct they are NOT atheists since the definition is lack of belief in God or gods.
If you want to you can call some Buddhists atheists
Atheists believe there is no God or life force or soul.
There is the argument about Buddhism I accept that.
Not where Norway is concerned however since they are not Buddhist.

Agnioostics are NOT atheists. I have been quite clear from the Nones report exactly what I meant by Atheist and agnostic.

Norway is NOT an atheist country!

But two can play the definition game: There was only ONE Christian in the entire world. To qualify as a Christian, you have to be King of Belgium, and be ok with killing millions.

Nope christian = a belief in christ and in following what Christ taught.
Christian government = a state linked to such teachings e.g Norway
You just can't get opf the hook on this one. Norway is not 70% AStheist.
The Lutheran church is linked to the State!

Given your "not a majority believe in God" definition France and the UK are atheist countries! This would be the UK where they have Lords Temporal and the Queen is heard of the church and defender of the faith? That is your definition of atheist is it? SAdly for you Gallup eurostat and the Swedish own central statistics office don't happen to agree with you.

marienbad

ISAW Would you accept then that Norway is 70% non christian - as christianity defines itself ?

ISAW

marienbad wrote: »

ISAW Would you accept then that Norway is 70% non christian - as christianity defines itself ?

Marien i was not the one claiming "what about Norway. Norway is a christian country"

Others were claiming "What about Norway. Norway is atheist.!"

Remember?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76811495&postcount=2119
Which says "according to their latest census over 70% of Norway is atheist"
That just isn't true!

http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/tab/tab-244.html

Bhuddists and humanists togwther make up 92,000 of almost five million people.
It is completely insane to reclassify the 3.8 million church of Norway members as "atheist"!

Also non church of Norway christians are growing at almost three times the rate of humanists and they outnumber them by almost three to one!

There are also more Muslims than humanists/atheists

It just isn't an atheist country!

If you think the Church of Norway ( which is constitutionally linked to the State) is atheist go and take it up with them. http://www.kirken.no/english/engelsk.cfm?artid=5730

marienbad

ISAW wrote: »

Marien i was not the one claiming "what about Norway. Norway is a christian country"

Others were claiming "What about Norway. Norway is atheist.!"

Remember?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76811495&postcount=2119
Which says "according to their latest census over 70% of Norway is atheist"
That just isn't true!

http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/tab/tab-244.html

Bhuddists and humanists togwther make up 92,000 of almost five million people.
It is completely insane to reclassify the 3.8 million church of Norway members as "atheist"!

Also non church of Norway christians are growing at almost three times the rate of humanists and they outnumber them by almost three to one!

There are also more Muslims than humanists/atheists

It just isn't an atheist country!

If you think the Church of Norway ( which is constitutionally linked to the State) is atheist go and take it up with them. http://www.kirken.no/english/engelsk.cfm?artid=5730[/QUOTE]

Again ISAW you are not replying to the question I asked ,which is- do you accept that over 70% of Norway is non-christian , as Christianity defines itself ?

ISAW

marienbad wrote: »

If you think the Church of Norway ( which is constitutionally linked to the State) is atheist go and take it up with them. http://www.kirken.no/english/engelsk.cfm?artid=5730

Again ISAW you are not replying to the question I asked ,which is- do you accept that over 70% of Norway is non-christian , as Christianity defines itself ?

Marien waht part of If you think the Church of Norway ( which is constitutionally linked to the State) is atheist go and take it up with them do you not understand. Clearly the church of Norway think of their members as Christian. I am not going into a sideline debate about Lutherans not being Christian. Im not interested in rehearsing the Thirty years war or any sectarian Protestant Catholic debate. I'm quite happy that they are not atheist as claimed. Im also quite happy to accept their own claim that they are Christian.

ISAW

Marien before we get into it this "redifine countries as atheist" and " redefine atheists are religious" is nothing new

Again Fasgnadh:
https://groups.google.com/group/talk.atheism/msg/35f92c34cb8d270b?hl=en&dmode=source
Message-ID: <3wS2n.913$pv.95@news-server.bigpond.net.au>

>>> See http://www.mwmccarthy.com/hdi_v_religion/ wish says:

Where's North Korea? The last of the failed atheist regimes,
with a HDI so low it's off the Charts, and this atheist
stooges's website doesn't even include it!
More atheist DISTORTION and misrepresentation of the facts!

So having found those atheists lying about Australia being Atheist
when it is at teh TOP of the HDI list and is majority RELIGIOUS,
I took a closer look...

Where's the USA? Listed in the top dozen HDI, and with
80% of it's population THEISTS.. it gets dropped out of this
atheist crook's list!!!! 8^o

And the devious tactic of counting ONLY Christians and Muslims and
ignoring hundreds of millions of Hindu's, Taoists, Shinto,
Buddhists, Sikhs.. etc

and the facile attempt to MERGE atheists and agnostics when
the FAR LARGER number of agnostics in the USA EXPLICITLY REJECT
being lumped with atheists..

As soon as they are exposed and mocked for their lies,
they simply TELL ANOTHER LIE!


>>> There is a very strong correlation that shows that more developed
>>> countries,

USA, Europe, Canada, Australia.. are all MAJORITY RELIGIOUS nations

While the atheist ****HOLES, the USSR, Maoist China, Pol Pots
Cambodia and North Korea were all catastrophic failures!


No amount of FUDGING the data can hide the fact that the very
societies the atheists themselves choose to live in, the MOST
DEVELOPED, PROGRESSIVE, FREE and DEMOCRATIC societies are MAJORITY
RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES!!!!

Examine the data for yourselves.

Check each of the top 25 HDI nations.

See how many are majority theist populations, and how many are majority
atheist ..

NONE are majority atheist

The only remaining atheist state is Nth Korea.. an economic basket case
where it's people starve and a political TYRANNY!
[/quote]
Message-ID: <j_S2n.920$pv.344@news-server.bigpond.net.au>

Virgils HDI figures are FIVE YEARS out of date!
Using the 2009 HDI Data the top 25 Nations are listed below
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index )

Religious data using the websites cited by Virgil:

Top 25 HDI nations T= Majority Theist A= majority Atheist

Norway T " Church of Norway 85.7%, Pentecostal 1%, Roman Catholic 1%,
other Christian 2.4%"Muslim 1.8%, other 8.1%"

Australia T see above

Iceland T Lutheran Church of Iceland 80.7%, Roman Catholic Church
2.5%, Reykjavik Free Church 2.4%, Hafnarfjorour Free Church
1.6%, other religions 3.6%, unaffiliated 3%, other or
unspecified 6.2%

Canada T Roman Catholic 42.6%, Protestant 23.3% (including United
Church 9.5%, Anglican 6.8%, Baptist 2.4%, Lutheran 2%),
other Christian 4.4%, Muslim 1.9%, other and unspecified
11.8%, none 16%

Ireland T Roman Catholic 87.4%, Church of Ireland 2.9%, other
Christian 1.9%, other 2.1%, unspecified 1.5%, none 4.2%

Netherlands T Roman Catholic 30%, Dutch Reformed 11%, Calvinist 6%,
other Protestant 3%, Muslim 5.8%, other 2.2%, none 42%

Sweden T Lutheran 87%, other (includes Roman Catholic, Orthodox,
Baptist, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist) 13%

France T "Roman Catholic 83%-88%, Protestant 2%, Jewish 1%,
Muslim 5%-10%, unaffiliated 4%"

Switzerland T "Roman Catholic 41.8%, Protestant 35.3%, Muslim 4.3%,
Orthodox 1.8%, other Christian 0.4%, other 1%,
unspecified 4.3%, none 11.1%"

Japan T "Shintoism 83.9%, Buddhism 71.4%, Christianity 2%,
other 7.8% note: total adherents exceeds 100% because
many people belong to both Shintoism and Buddhism"

Luxembourg T "Roman Catholic 87%, other (includes Protestant,
Jewish, and Muslim) 13%"

Finland T "Lutheran Church of Finland 82.5%, Orthodox Church 1.1%,
other Christian 1.1%, other 0.1%, none 15.1%"

US T "Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other
Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim 0.6%,
other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4%"

Austria T "Lutheran Church of Finland 82.5%, Orthodox Church 1.1%,
other Christian 1.1%, other 0.1%, none 15.1%"

Spain T "Roman Catholic 94%, other 6%"

Denmark T "Evangelical Lutheran 95%, other Christian (includes
Protestant and Roman Catholic) 3%, Muslim 2%"

Belgium T "Roman Catholic 75%, other (includes Protestant) 25%"

Italy T "Roman Catholic 90% (approximately; about one-third
practicing), other 10% (includes mature Protestant
and Jewish communities and a growing Muslim immigrant
community)"

Lichtenstein T "Roman Catholic 76.2%, Protestant 7%, unknown 10.6%,
other 6.2%"

New Zealand T "Anglican 14.9%, Roman Catholic 12.4%,Presbyterian 10.9%,
Methodist 2.9%, Pentecostal 1.7%, Baptist 1.3%, other
Christian 9.4%, other 3.3%, unspecified 17.2%, none 26%

UK T "Christian (Anglican, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian,
Methodist) 71.6%, Muslim 2.7%, Hindu 1%, other 1.6%,
unspecified or none 23.1%"

Germany T "Protestant 34%, Roman Catholic 34%, Muslim 3.7%,
unaffiliated or other 28.3%"

Singapore T "Buddhist 42.5%, Muslim 14.9%, Taoist 8.5%, Hindu 4%,
Catholic 4.8%, other Christian 9.8%, other 0.7%,
none 14.8%"

Hong Kong T eclectic mixture of local religions 90%, Christian 10%

Greece T Greek Orthodox 98%, Muslim 1.3%, other 0.7%

Every one of the top 25 HDI nations is according to the ATHEISTS DATA,
a majority RELIGIOUS society!!!

Game Set MATCH!!!!!!

marienbad

So ISAW you would be happy for the rest of the world to model themselves on Norway et al as the best way forward ?

Morbert

ISAW wrote: »

So the principles were first announced without mentioning Jews religion or Marxists.

A but like announcing "we are only interested in secularism" to " we need to remove the Church from Schools" to "out with God in with atheism"

So leaving aside the inherent problems with the above statement, your answer is "no". You believe atheism causes atrocities in the same way Nazism causes atrocities. This is where your entire argument falls apart. You can say "Sure, oppressive Totalitarian regimes used atheism to quash subversive elements in society, and to destroy pre-established social and ethical systems, with disastrous consequences.". But there is nothing which suggests "I don't believe in God" in any way implies oppressive policies or racial/national/totalitarianism.

I have asked you several;; times and you have not answered. Do you regard atheism as a better way for society? Do you think the world would be better off iof religious belief was replaced by atheism? In the sort of country you pretend Norway to be?

I have answered you multiple times. Atheism is not a way. That is like asking "Do you regard Fourier expansions as a better way for society?". I regard atheism as true. And I regard secular pluralism as a better way for society.

It is the idea that there is no God. Do you think the would would be more preferable if people believed that?

Yes, but only insofar as I consider atheism to be true. It is certainly not an ethical or socio-economic foundation. I wouldn't expect it to be. Furthermore, if we lived in a secular pluralist society consisting of 90% Christians (the non nut-job variety), I would be perfectly happy, and be content to only promote atheism through rational discourse.

Again? You are accusing me of lying before?
This took me about 30 seconds to find:
http://www.irishcatholic.ie/site/content/pluralism-and-patronage-primary-schools-rory-fitzgerald
" the bishops said Minister Quinn's suggestions that 50 percent of primary schools be divested was ''very unhelpful''.

Maybe you think the Irish Catholic are Lying too?

How about the Ministers own press office?
Another 30 seconds
http://www.education.ie/home/home.jsp?maincat=&pcategory=10861&ecategory=11469&sectionpage=12251&language=EN&link=link001&page=2&doc=52836

Still think I'm lying?
Unlike your cartoon majority of Norway being atheist I don't make up figures.
I certain don't try to defend something when the evidence is there showing comic book argument is just that - laughable. As I stated funny but not actually true. Please don't claim I ever try to be deliberately dishonest with any statistics ever. Doing so undermines academic credibility but I would not do it because it isn't morally acceptable. But of course since morals are meaningless to you I don't expect you to understand that.

You said he said "Let's start by..." implying atheists are engaged in some conspiracy to bring about a new Mao-inspired social order, which is the thesis you keep pushing. I am well aware that he wants to establish a landscape consisting of half Catholic-ethos schools and half multi-denominational schools. There is nothing wrong with wanting schools to reflect demand, as his quote implied. Nothing anti-family, and certainly not a hidden "atheist" way.

I claimed it is about 90% Lutheran. It is no way 70% atheist!
Gallup/Eurostat etc. say it isnt.

Correct they are NOT atheists since the definition is lack of belief in God or gods.
If you want to you can call some Buddhists atheists
Atheists believe there is no God or life force or soul.
There is the argument about Buddhism I accept that.
Not where Norway is concerned however since they are not Buddhist.

Agnioostics are NOT atheists. I have been quite clear from the Nones report exactly what I meant by Atheist and agnostic

What? Plenty of atheists believe in a life force or soul. There are some that even adopt a vitalist position. And many believe in the supernatural. Plenty (including myself) are agnostics too!

But according to you only 13 of the 33 Eu countries are not atheist. 20 European countries are atheist according to you based on your reasoning of the " I believe ther is a God" answer being in a minority.The results reveal some principal tendencies. The first being that there is seemingly a
move away from religion in its traditional form - “I believe there is a God” - which
seems to affect the Protestant countries, such as the Netherlands, Denmark and
Sweden, as well as countries with a strong secular tradition such as France and
Belgium. At the same time there is an affirmation of traditional religious beliefs in
countries where the Church or Religious Institutions have been historically strong,
notably, Greece, Cyprus, Portugal and Ireland. In certain Eastern European countries,
in spite of 40 or 50 years of communism, a strong attachment to religion emerges in
Catholic countries such as Poland, Croatia and Slovakia. The third tendency is the
development of a new kind of religion characterised by the belief that “there is some
sort of spirit or life force”. This new religion or spirituality is more marked in certain
Protestant countries, such as Sweden or Denmark as well as in the Czech Republic and
Estonia.

I was actually pleasantly surprised by the numbers in other countries as well. Soon we can begin phase 2 of our plan.

tommy2bad

Soon we can begin phase 2 of our plan.

Careful, your not supposed to mention the plan
Actual whats happening is the individualization of religion. Populations are not becoming atheist in the sense of believing that no god exists, instead they are reluctant to identify with any religious grouping. They believe what they believe and see no reason to formalize that belief. Its like what happened marriage, people stopped seeing it as anything more than a personal arrangement.
This hasn't replaced marriage but has changed its status in society. And with it the definition of family.
Whether this is as a result of the collapse in faith in institutions generally or specifically religious institutions is debatable, I suspect its as much a phenomena of consumerism as anything else.

ISAW

marienbad wrote: »

So ISAW you would be happy for the rest of the world to model themselves on Norway et al as the best way forward ?

So marien. You are very happy to take arguments not made by such as "Norway is an atheist country" and turn them into a claim I didn't make like "Isaw believes all countries should be like Norway"?

ISAW

Morbert wrote: »

So leaving aside the inherent problems with the above statement, your answer is "no". You believe atheism causes atrocities in the same way Nazism causes atrocities. This is where your entire argument falls apart. You can say "Sure, oppressive Totalitarian regimes used atheism to quash subversive elements in society, and to destroy pre-established social and ethical systems, with disastrous consequences.". But there is nothing which suggests "I don't believe in God" in any way implies oppressive policies or racial/national/totalitarianism.

Except for the fact hat ALL the "there is no god" governments were oppressive murder regimes and the ones that allowed religion were not.

And as for arguments falling apart . Do you realy believe atheism is a better way?
Do you relly believe Norway is an atheist country? do you believe Norway has adopted atheism in any way whatsoever as part of their constitution like it has the Lutheran church?

I have answered you multiple times. Atheism is not a way. That is like asking "Do you regard Fourier expansions as a better way for society?". I regard atheism as true. And I regard secular pluralism as a better way for society.

do you believe society would be better if people were atheist and religion was rejected?

Yes, but only insofar as I consider atheism to be true. It is certainly not an ethical or socio-economic foundation. I wouldn't expect it to be. Furthermore, if we lived in a secular pluralist society consisting of 90% Christians (the non nut-job variety), I would be perfectly happy, and be content to only promote atheism through rational discourse.

Okay wee let you into the club then but if you start any trouble you will be barred.

You said he said "Let's start by..." implying atheists are engaged in some conspiracy to bring about a new Mao-inspired social order, which is the thesis you keep pushing. I am well aware that he wants to establish a landscape consisting of half Catholic-ethos schools and half multi-denominational schools. There is nothing wrong with wanting schools to reflect demand, as his quote implied. Nothing anti-family, and certainly not a hidden "atheist" way.

Funny how you are "well aware" of 50% Catholic" and before i pointed it out to you you claimed you never were aware of it at all.
When i stated I interpret "lets start by getting rid of 50% of ethos schools" as an anti family anti church atheists together way. you said message 2148 " I cannot find that quote. Are you making things up again?"

What? Plenty of atheists believe in a life force or soul. There are some that even adopt a vitalist position. And many believe in the supernatural. Plenty (including myself) are agnostics too!

You are the one fudging now. Quite clerly I stated atheist = ther is no God.
So you want to call all peopl ewho believe in supernatural tyhings who are not part of mainstream religions atheist. Even then the numbers are tiny and that is so for Narway.
You can't get off the hook trying this and trying to call Lutherans atheist.

But in any case I have stated to you before by hard "atheist" I mean no God and no supernatural forces.

I was actually pleasantly surprised by the numbers in other countries as well. Soon we can begin phase 2 of our plan.

I know it! See I was right all along!