An Atheist's Take on Christian Prayer.

What caused the oppression, (which, to be clear, I am against) was it a lack of belief in gods, or people wanting control?

Example: An atheist can't say, "I don't believe god, therefore gays can't marry." But a bible-believing person can.

 

the part in bold can be removed and the answer to that question would be the same.

 

I understand, I've said the same. But my other question I don't think has been answered. What's easier to do, convince someone to do/not do things that their cultural deity has "said," or to convince someone to do/not do things because they don't believe in deities?

Another way to ask, is it easier to declare to be good and keep responsibility for your actions as lawmaker when you have no one to point the finger at but yourself, or to be able to pass the buck to a "just" and "wrathful" deity?

[edit] I'm going to move this conversation to the other thread, as this is a fine conversation but isn't on topic.
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=453261&f=47

 

I wish atheists were cool about their position. Instead they seem as hung up on their belief as some of the religious nutcases we see in the conservative party, if you are a true atheist then keep it to yourself, nobody wants to be told they are wrong it is all subjective and relies on personal belief.

 

I wish theists were cool about their position. That way, there wouldn't be a need to "balance" out the um ... "information."

 

Can you think of an example of a leader who caused oppression as a result of following the teachings and example of Jesus--as opposed to an ideology developed centuries after the death of Jesus independently of what he said and did. Or, as you put it, "What caused the oppression, (which, to be clear, I am against)? Was it a lack of belief in gods, or people wanting control?" If that excuse works for atheism, it should also work for Christianity.

 

why does an atheist give a fuck about what Christianity does?..

 

Then its power should be limited. I think most people would agree on that. But it shouldn't just be outright banned...

 

Religion slows progress.... Oh god i had to laugh. Are all atheists this full of themselves?

I bet you think this graph is accurate too!





This is how i picture you...

 

As long as their hands are not in my pocket or their message in my face,I don't care what atheists OR theists do. To each their own. There's no definative answer to existance,gods,the afterlife,etc, and anyone who can be totally honest with themself knows it. Empiricism is one thing,faith another. The former -definately usefull,the latter-can be.

 

Our father who farts in heaven hallowed chicken chow mein..

 

I agree, never said so.

 

On that, I agree. Being alive is an amazing experience and I'm still trying to make sense of it. I resist all efforts to foreclose honest inquiry, whether it be religious dogma or atheism. I operate on the basis of what seems to be the most plausible explanations based on the available evidence, including my personal experience, information, intuition and judgment. When somebody tells me that I shouldn't call myself a Christian because others who use that label have misbehaved, I reject that as nonsense. "Christian" seems to me to be the most appropriate label for the fundamental teachings and example of Jesus, which I take to be unconditional, non-judgmental love for everybody.

 

Well, I would have to say that wanting control was probably part of it but since for the most part the religions in the Soviet Union were not overtly resisting or rebelling against the government of the time, one would have to ask why Atheists would oppress them?

A person can pretty much say and do anything they want, no matter what they "believe". So, yes an Atheist could very well say and in fact the Soviets did say, "I don't believe in god, therefore you can't either".

 

Again, you assume that a person that has no "morals" is somehow better at resisting coercion than someone who does.

That is just not true, there is nothing to prevent an atheist giving absolute authority to a government or ruler, no matter how corrupt that government might be. After all, the simple threat of death, since an atheist has but one life to live, can be a pretty persuasive argument to get someone to do almost anything.

You are correct, since an Atheist has no standard of right or wrong, good or bad; it is easier to just "make it up as you go along". There is no objective right or wrong, good or bad and so anything and includes genocide and child abuse can be considered as good.

It is hard to see how this thread is off topic, since the OP was pretty much a rant against Christianity and thus almost any defense of Christianity would be on topic.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4nSxArk9g8"]Thanksgiving Prayer William S Burroughs - YouTube

Thanksgiving day prayer.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55h1FO8V_3w"]Patton Oswalt - Sky Cake - YouTube

 

The idea that atheists have no sense of morality is just totally untrue.

Religious morals follow innate human morals, not vice versa.

Though we must also apply, for freedom's sake, the "does it hurt anyone else" test to everything.

 

I totally agree. I know lots of atheists, and would trust many of them as much as, if not more than, Christians. In fact, some of them seem to be atheists because they think it's more intellectually honest than the alternatives. That raises the intriguing question, where do the "innate human morals" that guide them come from? Sam Harris' morals, which he expounds in The Moral Landscape, seem to be warmed over utilitarianism, with perhaps a dash of Buddhism from his meditation experience. After telling us that our behavior is completely determined and we are essentially automatons, he paradoxically proceeds to explain how we should behave on the basis of principles he derives from "the well-being of conscious creatures." I think it's safe to say many atheists get their sense of right and wrong from our culture, to which, in the West, Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman ethical traditions contributed heavily. This underscores the point that if atheism is simply the absence of belief in God, atheists have to turn elsewhere for meaning and morality.

 

If we followed the bible (as a nation) we would be morally bankrupt. (not that we don't have problems as it is)

Anyone can look at the bible and see that it is because we have moved beyond it that we can say it is an immoral way to live, much less govern a society.

In other words, saying that a moral base came from a religious book, particularly the bible, is ... well, an interesting thought.