Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

"Atheists are just as intolerant, if not more so, than most religious" - discuss

135

Comments

  • #62
    Ellis Dee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,512 ✭✭✭Ellis Dee


    As this poster suggests, there is indeed something "magical" about atheism.

    atheism_220.png

    :cool:


  • #63
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    I have no idea what capitalism has to do with anything, but basically your argument boils down to ''religion gives us morals'', which is quite simply incorrect, and it's painstaking how often this has to be pointed out to people.


    I think you are incorrect. But please explain to me the moral basis for atheism so and why those morals would be followed by people who are barely getting by financially. That's what capitalism has to do with it. Capitalism could not function without the moral foundation that religion provides for those who struggle. That is not true in every case of course but generally it is. It provides a sense of community and belonging that atheism can never do.
    Also, I think you may be overestimating how much social cohesion is provided by religion in working class and lower middle class areas.

    No. Most definately not. And history backs that up. Look at all the former communist regimes. What do they all have in common?


  • #64
    Nollog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,863 ✭✭✭Nollog


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    I have no idea what that means.

    A lot of atheists argue that Christianity is evil and give examples like the crusades, and show how they used their faith to conquer other lands.
    This is just an easy example off the top of my head.

    And it amounts to the same point as what the poster you dismissed said on the previous page.
    In reverse, of course.


  • #65
    yawha
    Closed Accounts Posts: 695 ✭✭✭yawha


    darkman2 wrote: »
    My own opinion is that alot of atheists I have listened to do come across as if they think they are somehow intellectually superior to those who believe in the more established religions. They may not even recognise it themselves that they come across like that.
    I don't think that really. I think people are just .
    darkman2 wrote: »
    However there are some major problems outside the realm of whether a God or higher power exists or not. For the purposes of this particular post I would like to mention capitalism.

    (Where is he going with this you are asking to yourself, just bare with me!). I regard myself as a capitalist with a sprinkling of socialism to even things out somewhat. Now we all live in that system. That system only works with the co-operation of a majority that have no real net worth. These people generally are in so called working class areas and the lower middle class bracket which make up a small majority of the population - the coping classes if you will.

    What these classes have in common generally is religious faith which for them provides for some comfort and even moral guidance and maintains a certain social cohesion which allows the rest of society to function and make money essentially. For the upper middles classes is where dominance of religion over society breaks down and more liberal attitudes are prevalent generally. That's ok for them - they have wealth, they have money to varying degress. They are comfortable if not "rich". They have security. So it is all fine and good to be atheist if you don't require some sense of hope and community.

    To cut a long story short the various religions which atheists rail against do provide a vital service for society though they may not like to admit it. Religions like Christianity do provide for a moral code backed up by hope (or even fear if that code is regularly broken) which is a good glue for society generally.

    My point is what future does capitalism have if atheism became prevalent in society and what effect would that have on society as a whole? In upper middle class areas things might be ok at least for a while. But take away that comfort and moral blanket for those struggling to survive week to week as it is and I am not sure atheism can provide for that hope that they need.
    A) I've pretty huge moral problems with the use of religion as an authoritarian tool to delude the lower classes into believing that they shouldn't seek better lives for themselves.

    B) Even if what you say is true, which I don't really think it is. I'd have no problem with it if this main religion wasn't mentioned in our constitution, required to swear an oath to be a judge without lying, didn't control the vast majority of state schools, didn't promote unhealthy attitudes towards sex and masturbation, didn't promote homophobia or misogyny etc.

    Remember, atheism isn't anti-theism. Most of us could not give a fuck about what people believe (although we may sometimes enjoy debate on the subject). Most of us don't want to abolish religion, we just don't want it in a position of power, we don't want it in the public space endorsed by the state, and we don't want to have to pretend to adhere to it in order to get certain jobs, or to fit in socially etc.


  • #66
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    darkman2 wrote: »
    I think you are incorrect. But please explain to me the moral basis for atheism so and why those morals would be followed by people who are barely getting by financially.

    Atheism has nothing to do with morality.

    How do you explain religious countries in the Middle East, South America, U.S.A, Africa, how do they rate on the morality scale compared to Irreligious countries like in Scandinavia?
    darkman2 wrote: »
    No. Most definately not. And history backs that up. Look at all the former communist regimes. What do they all have in common?

    Totalitarianism.

    /godwined


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    /\/ollog wrote: »
    A lot of atheists argue that Christianity is evil and give examples like the crusades, and show how they used their faith to conquer other lands.
    This is just an easy example off the top of my head.

    And it amounts to the same point as what the poster you dismissed said on the previous page.
    In reverse, of course.
    I'm not sure you've thought this through, darling.


  • #68
    Nollog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,863 ✭✭✭Nollog


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    I'm not sure you've thought this through, darling.

    Yeah I haven't. It was just an off-hand remark on how hypocritical it was of you to dismiss her points.


  • #69
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    /\/ollog wrote: »
    Yeah I haven't. It was just an off-hand remark on how hypocritical it was of you to dismiss her points.
    Well if you can explain coherently how I was hypocritical then you get 3 bonus points.


  • #70
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    /\/ollog wrote: »
    darkman2 wrote: »
    P.S what do atheists call St Stephen's Day?


    You don't call it "Boxing Day" do you? Cause that would be a bit British and not liable to make you even more popular:D

    What about St. Patrick Day?

    What about Wednesday?


  • #71
    Nollog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,863 ✭✭✭Nollog


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    What about Wednesday?
    Why are there not parades every Wednesday?

    I don't feel like it, Magic.
    I didn't come here to argue, I came here to share my opinions and experience.
    Apologies if you took offense, I was just pointing it out and didn't mean to offend you.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    Atheism has nothing to do with morality.

    How do you explain religious countries in the Middle East, South America, U.S.A, Africa, how do they rate on the morality scale compared to Irreligious countries like in Scandinavia?



    Totalitarianism.

    /godwined

    Atheism has nothing to do with morality? Really? So what is the moral code you think everyone is going to try and live by? Atheism will never be a majority view but even so you cannot argue that morality has nothing to do with religion whilst saying atheism has nothing to do with morality. There must be a moral code of some sort in society and there must be something behind it.

    Me personally I don't require religion to have morals but there are many people who base their morals around religion - that is a fact of life and has been since the dawn of time for humanity.

    And, no, the answer I was looking for about communism was it's atheism ironically. No religion is tolerated in communism precisely because it leads to that spirit of community and hope I have already eluded to and you cannot have that in a totalitarian state.


  • #73
    yawha
    Closed Accounts Posts: 695 ✭✭✭yawha


    darkman2 wrote: »
    Me personally I don't require religion to have morals but there are many people who base their morals around religion - that is a fact of life and has been since the dawn of time for humanity.
    I'm not so sure that's a fact at all. You've just asserted that it's been a fact of life since the dawn of time for humanity.

    There's no evidence to suggest that less religious countries or areas are less moral than others, so that would suggest to me that what you are saying is not a fact and is without basis.


  • #74
    yawha
    Closed Accounts Posts: 695 ✭✭✭yawha


    darkman2 wrote: »
    And, no, the answer I was looking for about communism was it's atheism ironically. No religion is tolerated in communism precisely because it leads to that spirit of community and hope I have already eluded to and you cannot have that in a totalitarian state.
    No religion is tolerated in Communism because it is generally felt that, as Marx said, "religion is the opium of the people". It deludes working class people and eases their pain in dealing with their unhappy lives, rather than provoking them to fight for more rights and better lives for themselves.

    It's not tolerated in Totalitarian regimes (notice the distinction, to think that Communism and Totalitarianism are equal is incorrect), because it distracts from the cult of personality of the dictator. The dictator wishes to be viewed as a God on earth by his people. Topically, Kim Jong Il was a good example of this.


  • #75
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    yawha wrote: »
    I don't think that really. I think people are just .


    A) I've pretty huge moral problems with the use of religion as an authoritarian tool to delude the lower classes into believing that they shouldn't seek better lives for themselves.

    It is a harsh fact of life that that is precisely what is required to keep the working class in check so to speak. That is the aim of the middle class and always has been no matter how much anyone refutes it. There are certain people that must be kept in their place. For example the middle class are all for immigration and traveller's rights etc because they are not affected - until it reaches their doorstep one day and then the political correctness comes to a stunning halt. Our economic system requires tolerance of it from those who benefit little while the rest live comfortable or privilaged lives. It's only tolerance. The silent large section of society are not organised enough to change it radically. They get by through hard work (mostly, I am not talking about the lifetime dole sponger element) and a sense of community and a mostly false hope they can better themselves for the majority through education.

    To sustain this unequal system and the privilage placed on the few and keep this otherwise powerful social group from becoming too active the religious foundations that held these communities together over generations have been vital. If your wish is to see that changed you would want to have a solid base with which to replace it.


    I would not under estimate the positive role the Catholic church has had in working class areas in Ireland. It would be completely daft to deny that.


  • #76
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    yawha wrote: »
    I'm not so sure that's a fact at all. You've just asserted that it's been a fact of life since the dawn of time for humanity.

    There's no evidence to suggest that less religious countries or areas are less moral than others, so that would suggest to me that what you are saying is not a fact and is without basis.


    What do mean "less religious"? I am pretty sure there is a similar proportion of religious people in every single western country. For example the Scandinavian countries may not be nominally "Catholic" or "Protestant" but that does not mean people are more or less religious then they are here. There is just more variation. That suggests to me you have failed to invalidate my point and have just allowed me to strengthen it.
    You've just asserted that it's been a fact of life since the dawn of time for humanity.

    It has. How do you think discipline was maintained in the early stages of human development? It was mostly through early religious cults and figures implying consequences for those who behave in a certain way. Really bad consequences. It helped develop a moral code. There is far more evidence to prove that then there is to disprove it.


  • #77
    yawha
    Closed Accounts Posts: 695 ✭✭✭yawha


    darkman2 wrote: »
    It has. How do you think discipline was maintained in the early stages of human development? It was mostly through early religious cults and figures implying consequences for those who behave in a certain way. Really bad consequences. It helped develop a moral code. There is far more evidence to prove that then there is to disprove it.
    Is there? Can you link me to any papers or anything that support this view of the origin of morality?

    It's an interesting theory, and I don't disagree with you that organised religion likely originated as a means for controlling people with fear, but I don't think that human morality ultimately derives from that and I'm not sure that the evidence is overwhelming that it does. I think that the existence of pain, and empathy, and desire for love and all these other things we've evolved have contributed to morality in people and societies.


  • #78
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    yawha wrote: »
    Is there? Can you link me to any papers or anything that support this view of the origin of morality?


    With respect I never said it was the "origin" of morality. My point was that it helped define morality (in my view the crucial ingredient of the morals most have today) and pretty much impose it.


    Whether it was imposed through fear or not though in my view does not alter the substance that morality derives alot from religion and for many exclusively from religion but not for all obviously.


  • #79
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    yawha wrote: »
    No religion is tolerated in Communism because it is generally felt that, as Marx said, "religion is the opium of the people". It deludes working class people and eases their pain in dealing with their unhappy lives, rather than provoking them to fight for more rights and better lives for themselves.


    Precisely my point. I agree. And what system requires that delusion/belief to maintain a status where the majority just get by whilst the minority have genuine wealth and assets? - Capitalism, our economic system. That was my point about why the capitalist system has an interest in maintaining religion (it's not only religion of course - there are loads of pieces of the jigsaw but religion is a big part). It may be a delusion. None of us know whether God exists or not. But it is a very convenient sideshow do you not agree?


  • #80
    18AD
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,821 ✭✭✭18AD


    darkman2 wrote: »
    With respect I never said it was the "origin" of morality. My point was that it helped define morality (in my view the crucial ingredient of the morals most have today) and pretty much impose it.


    Whether it was imposed through fear or not though in my view does not alter the substance that morality derives alot from religion and for many exclusively from religion but not for all obviously.

    I think this is specifically a relic of writing. It just so happens that the earliest records are of a religious nature. There's no telling whether the writing was influenced by a morality that was separate from religion or whether the religion was coextensive with the morality. In all likelyhood they both arose simultaneously, as a lot of the disciplines of the ancient world have no distinct boundaries.


  • #81
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    darkman2 wrote: »
    P.S what do atheists call St Stephen's Day?


    You don't call it "Boxing Day" do you? Cause that would be a bit British and not liable to make you even more popular:D

    Oh dear, not just an intolerant atheist with a superiority complex - but BRITISH...something oddly ironical about that statement. :p

    Being from them there foreign shores, I call it boxing day...I'd never even heard of st stephen's day until a few years ago so it's force of habit now - and of course it's always nice to annoy those that get all het up about it being called boxing day. :D


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    bluewolf wrote: »
    then most religious what

    Is that a question?


    I could not fit it all in the thread title! :pac:

    "Faiths" is the missing word.

    Such intolerance of long titles that don't fit.


  • #83
    Amari Uninterested Sunblock
    Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Amari Uninterested Sunblock


    darkman2 wrote: »
    Is that a question?


    I could not fit it all in the thread title! :pac:

    "Faiths" is the missing word.

    Such intolerance of long titles that don't fit.

    it was my way of saying you meant "than", not then
    "then" would mean something entirely different


    tumblr_lqph21Exuj1qbze77o1_400.png


  • #84
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    Oh dear, not just an intolerant atheist with a superiority complex - but BRITISH...something oddly ironical about that statement. :p

    lol - indeed.


  • #85
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    bluewolf wrote: »
    it was my way of saying you meant "than", not then
    "then" would mean something entirely different


    Intolerance of spelling mistakes too. You're on a roll.


  • #86
    Standman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭Standman


    I went to extremely boring mass last night simply to please my mother, the intolerant atheist that I am..


  • #87
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    I'd say that an Atheist equating the rearing of children in the Christian Faith with Child Abuse is an example of gross intolerance ... and a lot worse!!!:(
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76173585&postcount=32
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056493720&page=3

    Its a direct threat to the parental rights of all Christian Parents.

    ... and something that no Christian, worthy of the name, would say about Atheist parents!!!

    I am prepared to forgive Robin ... and put it down to excessive quantities of Christmas spirits ... if he withdraws it!!!


  • #88
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    darkman2 wrote: »
    What do mean "less religious"? I am pretty sure there is a similar proportion of religious people in every single western country.

    You would be wrong in believing that. The number of people who do not consider themselves religious varies wildly, from under 10% to over 70%, in different western nations.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion#Irreligion_in_the_World
    (bear in mind some of these statistics are somewhat out of date, for example Ireland is down at 4.5% based on the 2006 census. This number has gone up quite a bit since)

    I don't want to sound dismissive, but I feel you would benefit from doing a bit more research before making assertions here as this is not the first factual error you have made on thread that could have been easily avoided via a quick google.


  • #89
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    J C wrote: »
    Tolerance cuts both ways ... and we therefore should all respect and love one another as the amazing sovereign Human Beings that we all are!!!:)

    I don't have to love anyone and I chose to respect people, if not their beliefs. I tolerate everything, I don't like a celebrate every ridiculous delusion that people have. You just proved my point about how "tolerance" has come to mean something completely different to its actual meaning.


  • #90
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    darkman2 wrote: »
    Thanks for the replies.


    My own opinion is that alot of atheists I have listened to do come across as if they think they are somehow intellectually superior to those who believe in the more established religions. They may not even recognise it themselves that they come across like that.

    One can still think that you are right and someone else is ridiculously wrong and still be tolerant of their beliefs.
    However there are some major problems outside the realm of whether a God or higher power exists or not. For the purposes of this particular post I would like to mention capitalism.

    (Where is he going with this you are asking to yourself, just bare with me!). I regard myself as a capitalist with a sprinkling of socialism to even things out somewhat. Now we all live in that system. That system only works with the co-operation of a majority that have no real net worth. These people generally are in so called working class areas and the lower middle class bracket which make up a small majority of the population - the coping classes if you will.

    What these classes have in common generally is religious faith which for them provides for some comfort and even moral guidance and maintains a certain social cohesion which allows the rest of society to function and make money essentially. For the upper middles classes is where dominance of religion over society breaks down and more liberal attitudes are prevalent generally. That's ok for them - they have wealth, they have money to varying degress. They are comfortable if not "rich". They have security. So it is all fine and good to be atheist if you don't require some sense of hope and community.

    To cut a long story short the various religions which atheists rail against do provide a vital service for society though they may not like to admit it. Religions like Christianity do provide for a moral code backed up by hope (or even fear if that code is regularly broken) which is a good glue for society generally.

    My point is what future does capitalism have if atheism became prevalent in society and what effect would that have on society as a whole? In upper middle class areas things might be ok at least for a while. But take away that comfort and moral blanket for those struggling to survive week to week as it is and I am not sure atheism can provide for that hope that they need.

    I hope you understand what I mean. I will try and make a better point of it later. Essentially we need elements of every religion to maintain solid social cohesion especially through tough times.

    Wow. Seriously?! You question whether Atheists are tolerant of people's beliefs but are quite content to see them manipulated through said beliefs to hold them down in society?

    To tolerate groups that do such a thing to people is much worse than not tolerating a person's personal beliefs. Surely you can see that?


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    darkman2 wrote: »
    Atheism has nothing to do with morality? Really? So what is the moral code you think everyone is going to try and live by? Atheism will never be a majority view but even so you cannot argue that morality has nothing to do with religion whilst saying atheism has nothing to do with morality. There must be a moral code of some sort in society and there must be something behind it.

    Me personally I don't require religion to have morals but there are many people who base their morals around religion - that is a fact of life and has been since the dawn of time for humanity.

    And, no, the answer I was looking for about communism was it's atheism ironically. No religion is tolerated in communism precisely because it leads to that spirit of community and hope I have already eluded to and you cannot have that in a totalitarian state.

    Owww... it hurts.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18w6RLHiRMs


Advertisement