The Satanic quality of the Internet

[MH]

Originally Posted by Skybird

when you consider all these examples and many others, then you may get an idea why atheists maybe find the secular state order of the US in danger and themselves under pressure and thus decide that they want to organise their resistence to all this religious madness - to increase their own chance of survival.
.

I can sympathise with that.
Yet it all looks just like another day in America which contrary to some wishful thinking is not Europe.
Therefore things might be more colorful there but not necessarily mean that USA is turning into some fundamentalist police state like Egypt.

So they got bible belt and the rest of USA too....and wait....European president...and and world wide web

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by MH

I can sympathise with that.
Yet it all looks just like another day in America which contrary to some wishful thinking is not Europe.
Therefore things might be more colorful there but not necessarily mean that USA is turning into some fundamentalist police state like Egypt.

Egypt? In egypt polcie state and fundamentalism were set up against each other. I have something different in mind: fundamentalism and police state working hand in hand on the same grounds: I compare the threat the religious pose to America not to Egypt, but to Iran.

Atheist conventions? I am not aware we have that over here, and if it happens, it is happening outside the reach of my radar screen. But beside the conspirating Catholic church and the dummy protestants, we only have Islam sabotaging our society, but no radical militant Christian fundamentalists and evangelicals, so there might be a difference between Europe/Germany and the US here.

The projects are worldwide affairs, if you look beyond your strange "catholic conspiracy" you warned us of you will see that one of the "catholic" leaders of that german conspiracy is part of a German group of atheists pushing these discussions, but hey don't let facts disturb your faith

Dictionaries - in the end are about spelling only, not about encyclopedic definition.

No, that would be a concise dictionary which is brief, a proper dictionary not only explores all the meanings and definitions it also goes into depth about the origins and evolution of the words.
Why wriggle so much instead of accepting what was said?


joeg

i came across this very interesting talk by Daniel Dennet, titled "How to tell you are an atheist"

I like his cow one better.

SS

Beliefs are fine. It's when the believer insists that he knows the answer that trouble begins. This also includes those who insist on 'unbelief'. There aren't as many of those as the believers would have us believe, but there are a few and they tend to be voluable.

Yes, and those believing unbelievers can apply for special tax status to spread their message just like a church can.

[Skybird]

Another pastor calls for gay genocide

Just the latest in a longer line.

Here is the quiz - will this moron be brought to trial and sent to prison for hate crime, or will he be given the benefit of doubt again, since he is religious like the many religious bloodthirsty basterds before him?

Note that he bases - correctly - on the bible. The problem is less the man, but the ideology that has infested and poisened man'S mind. He porbbaly was not boren stupid. But he got an education and a brainwashing that turned him stupid, dangerous and unscrupulous.

[Skybird]

And while I have a run currently: here is the latest entry for a Darwin Award!

I assum he now is speaking in split tongues.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by MH

No...maybe it was like 700 years ago.

I didn't say religion, I said faith. Faith requires that you believe in absolutes, or else you're not a believer.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yes, and those believing unbelievers can apply for special tax status to spread their message just like a church can.

Only if they start a church.

Only if they start a church.

So those atheists run church then?
Do the big ones count as a cathedaral?

In your country they slot into (c) which is the same category as religious groups, it works pretty much the same in most countries, the only real difference being in those countries with a state church where the official church has a different tax set up.

[Skybird]

u_crank,

you did not accept when I said atheism is not a belief, atheists do not have a dogma they beolieve in and want to spread.

Half an hour ago I got a mail by a board-member, and he sent me a . By combining exerpts from several interviews and TV docus, by going from Carl Sagan over David Attenborough to Sam Harris and several others whose names were unknown to me, it sends spotlights from different directions at what atheists are about. There are many remarkable sentences being said, many of them worth to be picked and get quoted, but why should I do that when you can have it all.

Calm and reasonable. And right on the mark.

Now tell me, u_crank or anyone else, that atheism is a "belief", is dogmatic, is a religion, or whatever!

There is a bitter Irish joke, I read. A man gets stopped by a street patrol and asked: "Are you catholic or protestant?" The man says: "I am atheist." The patrol asks: "Okay, but are you a catholic or a protestant atheist?"



Consider how many cosmologic and creation myths and cults there are, how many religions, gods and goddesses, mythologies, traditions. Obviously, since there are so many and all claiming infallability, some of them must be wrong. Do you, do I, do we believe in most or even just some of them? - "We are all atheists. Some of us just go one god further."


P.S. And a random find, when watching that video I stumbled over which adresses the often made claim, also in this forum, that without religion there is no morality, and that only religion can be the source of absolute morality. - Absolute morality? Think twice before wanting that.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

you did not accept when I said atheism is not a belief, atheists do not have a dogma they beolieve in and want to spread.

Now tell me, u_crank or anyone else, that atheism is a "belief", is dogmatic, is a religion, or whatever!

If you carefully read all that I have said on this matter in this thread you will find what I have said quite clearly that Atheism is like a religion. I did not say it is a religion. There is a distinction between those two assertions. Post #17 - quote

"there are many forms of belief. Atheism is as dogmatic a belief system as any religion on this planet."

As to the 'belief system' argument I think I have said all I can say on that. If you don't accept that explanation I respect your choice. And as for the dogmatic, usually the most militant and active in any cause take this road. I'm not on it and have no idea whether you are or not.

The video is interesting but I have seen most of it before, as this subject interests me. Yes it is very calm and reasonable. And yes, from the atheist point of view it is right on the mark. Using science to prove that God doesn't exist is unusual. Do scientists have more insight on this than anyone else? Their inability to convince all others would suggest otherwise. The fact is neither side can 'prove' anything and is why I will not take part in that debate. If a person was to change his mind because of the 'debate', perhaps it can be changed again. It is an endless discourse.

I first heard the Irish joke here.



It's a very long video but the joke is at the 34:00 minute mark. Hitchens dry and straight faced humour is nicely displayed here. It is amazing to see two men with opposing ideas converse with such respect and openness. Well worth watching the whole thing. It is not a debate but a pre-debate discussion. It's cool that they have similar experiences and are in agreement on a number of topics. An excellent video.