Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

As an atheist, I agree with your point that it is completely unproductive (of either side obviously, but here you are talking about atheists), to call names, reduce the arguments to attack of religious people. As someone deeply harmed by religion, I can tell you, though, that there are serious harms coming from religion, not all religious people of course, and that is why some of us hold our positions with what sometimes feels like being militant. I appreciate a thoughtful, philosophical, logical discussion because it is important to me to add to the discourse that could one day change our world for the better.

To my fellow atheist:

I disagree with you in that no harmful irrational belief deserves respect, and I challenge you in that I doubt you give any other harmful and irrational beliefs respect, like flat earthers, racists, conspiracy theorists, people against allopathic medicine, and the like. This "respect" that we have been conditioned to give is neither warranted and, in fact, is nearly as harmful as the beliefs themselves as they allow them to continue without challenge.

It's time to call these things as they are: Mythology and fantasy. Yes, just like fairies, goblins, leprechauns, and unicorns.

That is what they are and all the respect they deserve.

Yes, the PEOPLE who hold the beliefs deserve respect as people, but not WRT their harmful bronze age mythology.

Anonymous wrote:Aren't both acts of faith? You "know" there is a god(s), or you "know" there isn't.

I'm firmly agnostic because of this.

Anonymous wrote:Aren't both acts of faith? You "know" there is a god(s), or you "know" there isn't.

I'm firmly agnostic because of this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

As an atheist, I agree with your point that it is completely unproductive (of either side obviously, but here you are talking about atheists), to call names, reduce the arguments to attack of religious people. As someone deeply harmed by religion, I can tell you, though, that there are serious harms coming from religion, not all religious people of course, and that is why some of us hold our positions with what sometimes feels like being militant. I appreciate a thoughtful, philosophical, logical discussion because it is important to me to add to the discourse that could one day change our world for the better.

To my fellow atheist:

I disagree with you in that no harmful irrational belief deserves respect, and I challenge you in that I doubt you give any other harmful and irrational beliefs respect, like flat earthers, racists, conspiracy theorists, people against allopathic medicine, and the like. This "respect" that we have been conditioned to give is neither warranted and, in fact, is nearly as harmful as the beliefs themselves as they allow them to continue without challenge.

It's time to call these things as they are: Mythology and fantasy. Yes, just like fairies, goblins, leprechauns, and unicorns.

That is what they are and all the respect they deserve.

Yes, the PEOPLE who hold the beliefs deserve respect as people, but not WRT their harmful bronze age mythology.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

As an atheist, I agree with your point that it is completely unproductive (of either side obviously, but here you are talking about atheists), to call names, reduce the arguments to attack of religious people. As someone deeply harmed by religion, I can tell you, though, that there are serious harms coming from religion, not all religious people of course, and that is why some of us hold our positions with what sometimes feels like being militant. I appreciate a thoughtful, philosophical, logical discussion because it is important to me to add to the discourse that could one day change our world for the better.

To my fellow atheist:

I disagree with you in that no harmful irrational belief deserves respect, and I challenge you in that I doubt you give any other harmful and irrational beliefs respect, like flat earthers, racists, conspiracy theorists, people against allopathic medicine, and the like. This "respect" that we have been conditioned to give is neither warranted and, in fact, is nearly as harmful as the beliefs themselves as they allow them to continue without challenge.

It's time to call these things as they are: Mythology and fantasy. Yes, just like fairies, goblins, leprechauns, and unicorns.

That is what they are and all the respect they deserve.

Yes, the PEOPLE who hold the beliefs deserve respect as people, but not WRT their harmful bronze age mythology.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

As an atheist, I agree with your point that it is completely unproductive (of either side obviously, but here you are talking about atheists), to call names, reduce the arguments to attack of religious people. As someone deeply harmed by religion, I can tell you, though, that there are serious harms coming from religion, not all religious people of course, and that is why some of us hold our positions with what sometimes feels like being militant. I appreciate a thoughtful, philosophical, logical discussion because it is important to me to add to the discourse that could one day change our world for the better.

Anonymous wrote:Some harms of believing:

The discouragement of rational, critical thought.

Vilification of homosexuality, resulting in discrimination, parents disowning their children, murder, and suicide.

Women treated like second class citizens based on religious teachings.

Children growing up to hate and fear science and scientists, because science disproves their parents' religion - leading to appalling scientific illiteracy.

People aren't making the most of this life because of their belief in an afterlife.

People dying - and letting their children die - because their religion forbids accepting medical help.

Women having septic abortions -- or being forced to have unwanted children they resent -- because religious organizations have gotten laws passed making abortion illegal or inaccessible.

Censorship (often destructive) of speech, art, books, music, films, poetry, songs and, if possible, thought.

Children spending the period of their lives when the brain is most receptive to learning new information reading, rereading, and even memorizing religious texts.

Holy wars - followers of different faiths (or even the same faith) killing each other in the name of their (benevolent, loving and merciful) gods.

The destruction of great works of art considered to be pornographic/blasphemous, and the persecution of the artists.

Slavery condoned by religious texts.

School boards having to spend time and money and resources on the fight to have evolution taught in the schools.

Hardship compounded by the guilt required to reconcile the idea of a fair god with reality ("why is God punishing me? What have I done wrong? Don't I have enough faith?").

Human achievements - from skillful surgery to emergency landings - attributed to gods instead of to the people actually responsible.

Billions spent to build, maintain, and staff houses of worship.

Anonymous wrote:Some harms of believing:

The discouragement of rational, critical thought.

Vilification of homosexuality, resulting in discrimination, parents disowning their children, murder, and suicide.

Women treated like second class citizens based on religious teachings.

Children growing up to hate and fear science and scientists, because science disproves their parents' religion - leading to appalling scientific illiteracy.

People aren't making the most of this life because of their belief in an afterlife.

People dying - and letting their children die - because their religion forbids accepting medical help.

Women having septic abortions -- or being forced to have unwanted children they resent -- because religious organizations have gotten laws passed making abortion illegal or inaccessible.

Censorship (often destructive) of speech, art, books, music, films, poetry, songs and, if possible, thought.

Children spending the period of their lives when the brain is most receptive to learning new information reading, rereading, and even memorizing religious texts.

Holy wars - followers of different faiths (or even the same faith) killing each other in the name of their (benevolent, loving and merciful) gods.

The destruction of great works of art considered to be pornographic/blasphemous, and the persecution of the artists.

Slavery condoned by religious texts.

School boards having to spend time and money and resources on the fight to have evolution taught in the schools.

Hardship compounded by the guilt required to reconcile the idea of a fair god with reality ("why is God punishing me? What have I done wrong? Don't I have enough faith?").

Human achievements - from skillful surgery to emergency landings - attributed to gods instead of to the people actually responsible.

Billions spent to build, maintain, and staff houses of worship.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

Are you done whining? Would you like to join the discussion of ideas?

Better yet, go back and read through threads. There have been more than enough examples and reasons provided of the ongoing harms of theism.

Greta Christina:

[Even] moderate religion still does harm. It still encourages people to believe in invisible beings, inaudible voices, intangible entities, undetectable forces, and events and judgments that happen after we die. And therefore, it still disables reality checks… making people more vulnerable to oppression, fraud, and abuse.

What’s more, moderate religion is in the minority. The oppressive, intolerant, reality-denying forms of religion are far more common, and far better at perpetuating themselves.

And moderate religion gives these ugly forms credibility. It gives credibility to the idea that believing in things there’s no reason to believe is valid, and actually virtuous. It gives credibility to the idea that invisible worlds are real, more real and important than the visible one. It gives credibility to the idea that our seriously biased personal intuition is more trustworthy than logic or verifiable evidence. It gives credibility to the idea that religious beliefs, alone among all other ideas, should be beyond criticism; that the very act of questioning religion is inherently intolerant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

Are you done whining? Would you like to join the discussion of ideas?

Better yet, go back and read through threads. There have been more than enough examples and reasons provided of the ongoing harms of theism.

Greta Christina:

[Even] moderate religion still does harm. It still encourages people to believe in invisible beings, inaudible voices, intangible entities, undetectable forces, and events and judgments that happen after we die. And therefore, it still disables reality checks… making people more vulnerable to oppression, fraud, and abuse.

What’s more, moderate religion is in the minority. The oppressive, intolerant, reality-denying forms of religion are far more common, and far better at perpetuating themselves.

And moderate religion gives these ugly forms credibility. It gives credibility to the idea that believing in things there’s no reason to believe is valid, and actually virtuous. It gives credibility to the idea that invisible worlds are real, more real and important than the visible one. It gives credibility to the idea that our seriously biased personal intuition is more trustworthy than logic or verifiable evidence. It gives credibility to the idea that religious beliefs, alone among all other ideas, should be beyond criticism; that the very act of questioning religion is inherently intolerant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is choosing to be a theist something that requires rebuttals? I mean, what's it to you?

That's what I just don't get in all these threads. Why are atheists so militant all the time? Do you live in some real life world where you find believers constantly threatening to burn you at the stake? That went out a while back. And anyway we used to burn each other too over things like having a cat or a third nipple.

I really think discussion threads could be more informative if it wasn't just a constant reply of "irrational, stupid. Insufficient evidence, etc."

I am new to DCUM and asked some genuine questions last year about atheism so I could have a better idea of life as an atheist, and what philosophical or logical thought patterns or techniques atheists used to calm themselves in stressful times, quell fears. Instead all I got was stuff like "not sky fairies."

So be it.

I mean, I chose to believe my cat loved me but that was irrational and evidence was at best inconclusive. But what skin was that off doglovers' noses? Or animal haters, for that matter?

Are you done whining? Would you like to join the discussion of ideas?

Better yet, go back and read through threads. There have been more than enough examples and reasons provided of the ongoing harms of theism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

There may be no good reason to hold to belief in God, except it becomes acceptable when so many people do it. And the promise of eternal life is great!

Some non-believers respect believers' right to hold religious views - even though they've rejected such views for themselves.

Such views are often not held in reverse. That is, believers often think it's acceptable to try to covert their friends to religion, when they've made it clear that they're not religious.

That's a reasonable bone to pick. But the "often" is weird to me but then I don't hold evangelical views. I would say "some" there too. This may lead to nonbelievers scolding me for being a bad believer, but I don't take the Bible literally either. Some believers don't lol.

I cannot imagine trying to convert anybody, especially when they have said they aren't religious. When they do that, I am vey careful to say I am thinking of then and hope they heal when they are injured or sick, never that I offer "thoughts and prayers."

As an atheist whose children and family that were deeply harmed by religion (also a PP), I wish all religious people were like you. However-they are not, and even NON evangelicals hold to some ways of thinking that can be harmful to others let alone themselves. That is why I am the activist that I am. In addition, "moderately" religious people still lend credence to a worldview and belief system that is ultimately caused great harm in this world, and by that measure is indirectly just as harmful. I happen to believe that most religious people (even the ones that caused harm to my familiy) are good people with brains that have been rewired into a system of belief that they are not really in control of. It is a reprogramming that has built in fail-safes, and that is very difficult to escape from

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it is it ok to say believers are stupid is it ok to say atheists are stupid?

Well, no. In the couple of posts prior, there is evidence for the "stupidity" of believers.

The atheists have demonstrated the opposite, intelligence.

Some believers are quite intelligent, though it doesn't show through in their belief in God. Also, some atheists are not so smart, except regarding their lack of belief in God.

I am no smarter now that I am an atheist. I am simply better informed.

I don’t believe that theists are, in general, stupid. But many clearly have to retreat to illogical positions to support their theological ones.

I believe that anyone who insists the flying spaghetti monster lives under my bed is less rational than me. They're making a claim they can't back up with reason or evidence. There's no reason to hold to the belief, and yet they do it anyway.

To me, irrational = illogical = stupid.

There may be no good reason to hold to belief in God, except it becomes acceptable when so many people do it. And the promise of eternal life is great!

Some non-believers respect believers' right to hold religious views - even though they've rejected such views for themselves.

Such views are often not held in reverse. That is, believers often think it's acceptable to try to covert their friends to religion, when they've made it clear that they're not religious.

That's a reasonable bone to pick. But the "often" is weird to me but then I don't hold evangelical views. I would say "some" there too. This may lead to nonbelievers scolding me for being a bad believer, but I don't take the Bible literally either. Some believers don't lol.

I cannot imagine trying to convert anybody, especially when they have said they aren't religious. When they do that, I am vey careful to say I am thinking of then and hope they heal when they are injured or sick, never that I offer "thoughts and prayers."

As an atheist whose children and family that were deeply harmed by religion (also a PP), I wish all religious people were like you. However-they are not, and even NON evangelicals hold to some ways of thinking that can be harmful to others let alone themselves. That is why I am the activist that I am. In addition, "moderately" religious people still lend credence to a worldview and belief system that is ultimately caused great harm in this world, and by that measure is indirectly just as harmful. I happen to believe that most religious people (even the ones that caused harm to my familiy) are good people with brains that have been rewired into a system of belief that they are not really in control of. It is a reprogramming that has built in fail-safes, and that is very difficult to escape from