Religious obsessed by Atheism

PopePalpatine

lazybones32 wrote: »

Their 'raison d'etre' is to counter whatever advertisement Christians are running... but strangely enough, I never see any campaigns directed against Allah or his prophet. I wonder why?

Islam isn't as deeply ingrained in western states as Christianity.

Technically speaking, there are just as many campaigns directed against Allah as there are against God - mainly because they're essentially the same deity.

expectationlost

Jernal wrote: »

What is it people confusing discussion topics with an obsession for something? Are people who post in the mustard forum obsessed with mustard? Possibly, but not all are. Some just have a fleeting interest in it. Lots of stuff on this forum may have religious undertones but that doesn't necessarily mean that anyone who posts here is obsessed with religion. Some people are obsessed with others business; other's aren't. By and large throughout history these people of power and very often they happened to be religious or spiritual clergy. The most amazing thing about our current time is that we've actually managed to liberate ourselves from cultural shackles so much that what others get up to is mostly none of our business unless there's severe harm involved.

you've seen the amount of replies of certain reilgious posters on others threads i call that obsessed

Pherekydes

catallus wrote: »

Because hatred and cowardice are often seen parading together as enlightenment?

The real reasons were posted [below] just after you posted. But don't let that stop you projecting Chritianity's very special brand of hatred on the forum regulars.

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Islam isn't as deeply ingrained in western states as Christianity.

Technically speaking, there are just as many campaigns directed against Allah as there are against God - mainly because they're essentially the same deity.

Delirium

catallus wrote: »

Because hatred and cowardice are often seen parading together as enlightenment?

Pherekydes

catallus wrote: »

Ah here, accusing me of projecting hatred is a bit harsh...for truly this valley is dark.

And you accuse us of sophistry?

You're a true hero. :rolleyes:

Kidchameleon

expectationlost wrote: »

i can give you examples from this board

Your OP didn't specify this board, it was a general question. Could you give examples from society in general and one or two from boards? Pretty much every thread in After Hours seems to get a pain in the backside atheist comment sooner or later. I also find that in general day to day interaction with people, an atheists religious views are much more likely to come up than a theists. That's just my experience though.

Kiwi in IE

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Your OP didn't specify this board, it was a general question. Could you give examples from society in general and one or two from boards? Pretty much every thread in After Hours seems to get a pain in the backside atheist comment sooner or later. I also find that in general day to day interaction with people, an atheists religious views are much more likely to come up than a theists. That's just my experience though.

Oxymoron of the day!

I'm not sure that religious people are obsessed with atheism so much. It's more the case that they are not content to follow their religious doctrines in a personal, private way, but rather insist on campaigning for some of these doctrines to be included in the law of the State, so that everyone is forced to follow them. If religious people kept their religion to themselves and stopped trying to force it on everybody, I don't imagine any atheist would have the slightest issue with religion.

Hotblack Desiato

Well, there'd still be the minor things like tax-exemption and covering up mass child rape.

Kidchameleon

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Oxymoron of the day!

No it isn't. A person can be religious and not believe in a god.

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I'm not sure that religious people are obsessed with atheism so much. It's more the case that they are not content to follow their religious doctrines in a personal, private way, but rather insist on campaigning for some of these doctrines to be included in the law of the State, so that everyone is forced to follow them. If religious people kept their religion to themselves and stopped trying to force it on everybody, I don't imagine any atheist would have the slightest issue with religion.

People will be for or against things regardless of their religious beliefs. Take for example abortion. There are theists and atheists against it. It probably looks like its mainly theists against abortion but that is because most people are actually theist!

Take another example, like stealing. I assume you are against it yes? Does that mean you are religious? Because the bible says stealing is bad mkay!

Kiwi in IE

Kidchameleon wrote: »

No it isn't. A person can be religious and not believe in a god.



People will be for or against things regardless of their religious beliefs. Take for example abortion. There are theists and atheists against it. It probably looks like its mainly theists against abortion but that is because most people are actually theist!

Take another example, like stealing. I assume you are against it yes? Does that mean you are religious? Because the bible says stealing is bad mkay!

Stealing is unethical. It causes harm to others. As for what the bible says; do you only eat animals that "part the hoof and are cloven footed and chew the cud"? Do you wear "a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material"? What about seafood? Do you only eat that which has fins and scales? So much focus on sexuality, women's rights and roles etc because 'the bible says', but never a word about any of the above. A sin is a sin right? Whether you steal or wear something that is 80% wool/20% polyester, or eat a scallop?

ankaragucu

God.Santa Claus.The Tooth Fairy.I grew out of believing in the second and third one.Even though there is more evidence for their existence than the first one.

Kidchameleon

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Stealing is unethical. It causes harm to others. As for what the bible says; do you only eat animals that "part the hoof and are cloven footed and chew the cud"? Do you wear "a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material"? What about seafood? Do you only eat that which has fins and scales? So much focus on sexuality, women's rights and roles etc because 'the bible says', but never a word about any of the above. A sin is a sin right? Whether you steal or wear something that is 80% wool/20% polyester, or eat a scallop?

WUT?????

Cabaal

catallus wrote: »

I'm glad you asked.

You see, the refusal to engage with or listen to the wisdom of religion is a symptom of the narcissistic and morally blind egotism which is caused by the modern cult of the individual.

ok,
and which one true religion would you like us to believe in?

Christian?
Muslim?
One of the countless 1,000's of other religions?

If we take christian and muslim faiths then both say they are the one true faiths/religions,

ankaragucu

Bang on Cabaal.Do believers of whatever religion never stop to think that well, whatever the one true religion is then all the others are wrong?
Therein lies the crux of the matter.By admitting this they are acknowledging that by law of averages theirs is one of the wrong religions.And just as they're afraid to admit there is no God in the first place because they cant handle the alternative, so too they'll not admit that in all likelihood their chosen religion is one of the wrong ones.
Much easier to bury their heads in the sand as usual.

lazybones32

expectationlost wrote: »

i can give you examples from this board

No thanks. Examples from Irish Society.

lazybones32

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Oxymoron of the day!

I'm not sure that religious people are obsessed with atheism so much. It's more the case that they are not content to follow their religious doctrines in a personal, private way, but rather insist on campaigning for some of these doctrines to be included in the law of the State, so that everyone is forced to follow them. If religious people kept their religion to themselves and stopped trying to force it on everybody, I don't imagine any atheist would have the slightest issue with religion.

What religious doctrines are sought to be enshrined in Law?
Can we only lobby for secular issues (such as?) or are you implying only atheists can have a say in how their Country is governed?

Aside from JW's, how many religious people knock on your door or "force" their religion on you? Are you obliged to attend synagogue on Fri/Sat or Mass on Sunday?

lazybones32

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Islam isn't as deeply ingrained in western states as Christianity.

Technically speaking, there are just as many campaigns directed against Allah as there are against God - mainly because they're essentially the same deity.

Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe in the same God but it is only the Christian religion that is parodied and mimicked. Judaism and Islam aren't as widespread as Christianity in Ireland but not elsewhere - America has a large Jewish Community as does England - but why don't the enlightened members of the Atheist Community raise their voice against the Jews and Muslims? Are they afraid of insulting these faiths; do they expect some consequence from singling-out Judaism or Islam?
We (theists), according to detractors, are all as 'mistaken' (or delusional) as each other but the atheists go after the 'big fish' first? Congratulations on the strategy and tactics employed on that one.

Brian Shanahan

lazybones32 wrote: »

Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe in the same God but it is only the Christian religion that is parodied and mimicked.

Not true at all. I see as many parodies of islam (and a lot more hatred directed towards islam and individual muslims) as I do of christianity, and while there is not as much parodying of judaism, consider the fact that everywhere (even in Israel if you include all the areas the country occupies) it is a minority and usually a tiny one.

Nearly every time I hear a commentator/politician complaining "you never see islam being mocked/parodied/complained about" it is usually a far-right one. And the other times it is a mainstream right commenator/politician cosying up to the far right readers/viewers/voters.

Eramen

lazybones32 wrote: »

Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe in the same God but it is only the Christian religion that is parodied and mimicked. Judaism and Islam aren't as widespread as Christianity in Ireland but not elsewhere - America has a large Jewish Community as does England - but why don't the enlightened members of the Atheist Community raise their voice against the Jews and Muslims? Are they afraid of insulting these faiths; do they expect some consequence from singling-out Judaism or Islam?
We (theists), according to detractors, are all as 'mistaken' (or delusional) as each other but the atheists go after the 'big fish' first? Congratulations on the strategy and tactics employed on that one.

Very well pointed out. The reason Dick Dawkins brand 'atheists' don't attack Islam and Judaism is obvious to most intelligent folk. These 'atheists' seek to hide behind a thinly veiled veneer of so-called 'progress' and 'equality'. It would be very un-politically correct of them to dissuade Muslims from practicing their religion (never mind a bit too dangerous for their type) and attacking the Jews is well.. let's just say it's never a good idea to criticize them whether rightly or wrongly. Atheist or not.

This effectively means that all atheists are 'allowed' to attack is the very foundations of European civilisation itself; the philosophies, religion, culture, values and customs that were, and still are, an integral part of our everyday life, and the very reason for our success in the first place mind you.

Atheism has no real meaning beyond being a party to maintaining the ideology of the secular society. Though I'm not too sure that modern-day atheists understand their own roots. This secularism arouse out of the Protestant reformation, which was sponsored by the merchant classes and some Princes in medieval Europe. They did this because they wanted to commercialize the economy, as Catholicism's 'poorness in spirit' and 'blessed are the poor' made it difficult for them to turn hefty profits at society's expense without interference from other powers (I'm not saying the RCC are the 'good guys' here, this is just how it happened). So they figured it would be better to overturn the church in order to make the power of money the rulers of the secular state.

This trend accelerated into the enlightenment and brought about the industrial revolution. Modern atheism simply continues on in this vain, further deracinating the masses from their human culture and values. In this way the rich inevitably become the super rich. Atheism, which is just secularized modern Protestantism, isn't the only 'problem' in this regard. The hyper-materialism that the reformation spawned takes many forms, the shallow pop-culture, stupefied politics were the masses are promised welfare in return for votes, the false intellectualism of education etc. Atheism is but one small part of a cultural phenomenon that simply promotes the destruction of one's own roots aka Western 'white man' values. And this, they call 'freedom'. If you oppose them you are a sexist, racist, homophobe, intolerant, yadda, yadda, yadda.

The only thing the Jews, Muslims and atheists have in common is the beards. But at the least the Jews and Muslims got balls and I can respect this. They don't trample all over their own civilisation, but instead have the humility to see where it came from, its continued benefits and continue to embrace it. Most atheists, and their bed-fellows the feminist, pathetically phoney Keynesian 'liberal', cultural-marxist etc, have no such regard. Instead they just have an ideological block.

ankaragucu

Eramen wrote: »

Very well pointed out. The reason Dick Dawkins brand 'atheists' don't attack Islam and Judaism is obvious to most intelligent folk. These 'atheists' seek to hide behind a thinly veiled veneer of so-called 'progress' and 'equality'. It would be very un-politically correct of them to dissuade Muslims from practicing their religion (never mind a bit too dangerous for their type) and attacking the Jews is well.. let's just say it's never a good idea to criticize them whether rightly or wrongly.


You obviously havent read Dawkins because he DOES in fact criticise Islam and Judaism and all other organised religions.Ridiculous to nit pick on this about which religions he complains most about.He thinks they're ALL pie in the sky thats the whole point!

robindch

Eramen wrote: »

Very [...] block.

Good lord, I'm surprised you didn't blame the Black Death, The Fall of the Roman Empire and Uggs on atheism too.

I can understand your sigline interest in "Negative Philosophy".

Pherekydes

Eramen wrote: »

The only thing the Jews, Muslims and atheists have in common is the beards.

'tis the only sensible thing I could find in your entire post to quote.

Ladies, let's see your beards!

Eramen

robindch wrote: »

Good lord, I'm surprised you didn't blame the Black Death, The Fall of the Roman Empire and Uggs on atheism too.

I can understand your sigline interest in "Negative Philosophy".

Europa: A History - Norman Davies

Why should we stop our educational intercourse regarding history etc when we finish school like it seems most have done ? .. surely the 'history channel' just doesn't cut it if we want to refine our knowledge?!

History is mainly about understanding the movements of ideas, giving rise to effects. Why do you continue to slavishly adopt the rte / dept of eejitcation view of the world? You must have a very poor view of anthropology at the very least!

In saying all this the ideological 'atheist' is too deeply bound within his own sub-cultural norms to go beyond the self-appraising beliefs he has borrowed from the moralists of his cause. You can't come to an impartial, birds-eye view of life with this attitude.

Corkfeen

Eramen while you're here, what do you classify as culturally extreme minorities?

ankaragucu

Er,amen to that!

PopePalpatine

Eramen wrote: »

History is mainly about understanding the movements of ideas, giving rise to effects. Why do you continue to slavishly adopt the rte / dept of eejitcation view of the world? You must have a very poor view of anthropology at the very least!

If we were all slavishly adopting the Dept. of Education view of the world, we'd still be devout Christians.

Eramen

PopePalpatine wrote: »

If we were all slavishly adopting the Dept. of Education view of the world, we'd still be devout Christians.

I don't ever recall having been indoctrinated into the Catholic religion even though I went to a Catholic school. However I know that it suits the Hitchens brand atheist to declare otherwise, that he was left mentally scarred and traumatized because of this 'horrific' episode of his life and is now seeking to cure his anguish with 15 hours of mmo gaming per day. This does not float my boat. Neither do I believe this narrative. This modern 'atheist' fiction only serves to paralyze the intellect and promote the idea of seeing oneself as an eternal victim at the hands of religion.

Just man up, embrace the good in your civilisation, including that parts of religion you find acceptable (Alain deBotton style), and change your life for the better. Why do you wear your sub-cultural identity on your sleeve? Why attack the foundation of civilisation, our culture, customs, values and ideals which are a requirement for advanced society? There is a lot to be said for for a unified society in ideals and ethics, and this can only be achieved through compromise. This means atheists and fundie Christians alike need to stfu about their selected narratives and see the commonality between themselves.

Devout Christian/atheists.. Sure, they are 'different' on the surface. But when you look deeper they have the same inner mentality. There's not much difference between them.

Both ideologies operate on the religious part of the psyche. All people have this part of the mind. It's a biological necessity. Here in this psychological niche, mere cultural truths become universal realities when processed by the intellect. We invent religion as a mechanism to help the individual create meaning out of the chaos of the constantly occurring changes we behold around us in nature.

Atheism, like anything else, is a mass movement preaching its own universal reality, it's own religious interpretation of life. Dawkins etc are simply cashing in on this phenomenon, providing a morality that atheists will find acceptable. It's just that it's a slave morality as Nietzsche would say. "Evil is anything that encourages weakness."

It's a morality that encourages of the destruction of the culture and civilisation that gives us a meaning, purpose and higher existence. At least the Christians have something going for them, as they don't seek to annihilate their own society through the idiocy of extreme ideology. Feminism, atheism, fabianism, cultural marxism, and phoney neo-Keynesian liberalism/conservatism. All the same bs, same origin.

Delirium

So the RCC is the foundation of civilisation and you weren't indoctrinated at an RCC school? You completely sure about that?

PopePalpatine

Eramen wrote: »

At least the Christians have something going for them, as they don't seek to annihilate their own society through the idiocy of extreme ideology. Feminism, atheism, fabianism, cultural marxism, and phoney neo-Keynesian liberalism/conservatism. All the same bs, same origin.

First of all - feminism is a spectrum of ideologies. At the very extreme end you'd get those who say that penis-in-vagina is rape, but I've never met a feminist in my life who believes that. Most of them want equality with men and not to have to travel abroad for vital medical procedures.

As for "fabianism" - if you're referring to the Fabian Society, who want to take gradual steps towards a socialist society - well, they can't be more destructive than laissez-faire capitalists - I'd hazard a guess that Fabians were (and still are) far and few between in the boardrooms of "too-big-to-fail" banks prior to the credit crunch.

"Cultural Marxism" sees the contemporary culture as a tool of oppression. For all of your posturing about how bad popular culture is, is it too much of a leap to suggest that you too may think along the same lines as them? If their society is oppressive, and produces an oppressive culture (*cough*auld Catholic Éire*cough*), why wouldn't they seek to dismantle it?

And FFS...have you ever considered it is possible to come up with a system of morality/ethics without creating a religion? For all of your grandiose and verbose posturing, I can't recall you ever mentioning empathy.

Eramen

SW wrote: »

So the RCC is the foundation of civilisation and you weren't indoctrinated at an RCC school? You completely sure about that?

I don't think you understand. Catholicism is made up of/is the embodiment of what came before it, i.e. Greek philosophy. Similarly the golden age of Greek civilisation is based on Pythagoreanism, which preceded Greek philosophy. All these form the basis of our civilisation. Each one grew out of and culminated into the next outer form while retaining the same metaphysical, cultural, inner language.

Atheism is based on the changes that happened in the church during the late middle ages through to the enlightenment. It sprouted materialism, which is scientific-humanism. This comes from Catholicism via Thomas Aquinas and Scholasticism. It's one of the core discourses of the Catholic religion. In this way atheism is an outgrowth of Christianity, particularly of the Protestant wing. "That every man can come to God through his own truth without the need for the intercession of a learned class of man (clergy)" was a central theme of this reformation.

Modern atheism has just run with this idea. It finds its place in the world by proselytizing that every man can be 'saved' through higher knowledge and awareness exercised in the world. This is the exact same principle as Christianity but in a more technical form suited for the commercial phase of our civilisation. There are no intellectual expressions contained in atheism that weren't contained in Christianity in some form.

Atheist and Christian ethics/morality are very hard to distinguish between because they are almost identical, due to them being part of the same movement of civilisation. One is based off the other.. ie Platonism morphing into humanitarianism.

The problem with most people is that they see themselves and their ideas as 'new', 'different', 'unique'.. when really all these ideas and movements are a product of Western civilisation through its various stages of change. Religions, cultures, ideas don't stand still or die completely. They grow organically and eventually wilt and fade as part of the cycle of time and nature. It's like saying your genetics are completely 'new' but they aren't, they come from your parents and are the produce of many generations. Ideas are the exact same.

Atheism will grow into something else in the future, and in fact I already see the changes happening. Materialistic atheism's critical mass was about 10 or 20 years ago or more.

Atheism and Christianity are blood-related and twins. If they were diametrically opposed our civilization would've destroyed itself by now.