What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Studies Conclude: Atheism = Peace, Religion = Confliction

Thank you for correcting yourself. This is indeed making Environmentalism being like-wise to religion. But simply because it has gained similar status, that being of pardon for an individuals beliefs, doesn't make it a religion. Not only that, but if any group of people with a strong belief in any specific conservation efforts were to have the same incidences happen to it as this environmentalist has endured, and they receive the same pardon, does that make them a religion? no. It just means they have the same pardon.

Not only that, But I wouldn't exactly call a Judge to be the best source of information on either Religion or Science unless they are well educated in either. For example, the quote from that article:

For those of us who say that could never happen here, let me remind you of a Supreme Court case defining religion decades ago as “a sincere and meaningful belief which occupies, in the life of its possessor, a place parallel to that filled by God.â€
Click to expand...

So Buddhism isn't a religion then? I'm sure you'd agree with me that there are too many religions out there with completely different view points, which means they cant simply be generalized that easily. well, when it comes down to specifics at least.

P.E.T.A Isnt a religion, we all know this, however there are a lot of people that believe in what P.E.T.A does (not me, just saying :D), and they are a rather active and semi-powerful group. according to this particular judge, P.E.T.A should be defined as a religion as well?
 
yes, that causes a condudrum as that would throw evolution as a religion, and that would be detremental to some, as now science falls under that.

think about that. that court case he's talking about was in the 60's! (the supreme court of the u.s.).
so if that were to happen here. man it would be good to some bad for others.(the creationist vs evolutionist contraversy)

not to mention athiesm falls into that.
 
jasoncran said:
Evointrinsic said:
jasoncran said:
not to mention athiesm falls into that.
Click to expand...

why would atheism fall under that? I think you need to ask more questions on my Atheist topic :lol
Click to expand...
by that judges ruling on the topic of enviromentalism.
Click to expand...

I still don't understand how Atheism would fall under that same thing. could you be more specific. what exactly does atheism have that would qualify to that judge as being a religion? or religion-like?
 
jasoncran said:
strong beleive as in philiosophy or world view, unless dont think you have a philosophy.
Click to expand...

Oh jason, you have so much to learn :D Atheists dont have a world view or philosophy. the only similarity all atheists share is the idea that there is no god. And even then, it's not strong in all of them or supposed to be. In fact, most atheists barely believe there isn't a god. There is no such thing as an atheistic world view, or a global atheistic thought process. Atheism is Only the believe in no god. So it doesnt really apply to the judges thoughts.
 
i wasnt implyed that it was unified, and uh you do have a world view. if you accept naturalism and the conclusion of the science behind the toe. unless you dont. i know not all athiest dont accept the toe, i will be reading book by some that dont when my friend is done with that one.

you aren't sure there's a god, you dont accept universal morality to my knowledge. you have an agnostic view on ghosts.

sounds like a world view to me. :shrug i know that you accept evolution. i was here when you debated that.
 
jasoncran said:
i wasnt implyed that it was unified, and uh you do have a world view. if you accept naturalism and the conclusion of the science behind the toe. unless you dont. i know not all athiest dont accept the toe, i will be reading book by some that dont when my friend is done with that one.

you aren't sure there's a god, you dont accept universal morality to my knowledge. you have an agnostic view on ghosts.

sounds like a world view to me. :shrug i know that you accept evolution. i was here when you debated that.
Click to expand...

I personally may have a world view, but that's my own. Like I said, Atheists don't need to have the same idea and follow the same things, It cannot possibly be defined as what Environmentalism is by that judge. But I'm glad to see your trying to find out more about it :yes :clap

However, I have friends that dont believe in evolution or god but do believe there are ghosts and an afterlife. All that is required to be an atheist is the disbelief in a deity. So these people are still atheists. Which is why Atheism really can't be placed in the same category.

By the way, what is the title of the book that you wanted to read?
 
what darwin didnt know. it attacks the toe on a more philosophical level.
my friend that has it is a retire healthscience teacher and YECer.

he was alittle disappointed that the book didn have more on the biology side of it,as he is alittle of out date on some things.
 
Evointrinsic said:
um no... you dont need a religion to tell you how to act. people do that naturally.
Click to expand...
I very much doubt it. It is simply impossible to disentangle all sorts of influences - religious ones included - from what "comes naturally". We are a product of our environment and an atheist who has grown up, say, in the USA or the UK, will have been influenced by the Christian worldview that still manifests itself in those nations in many and subtle ways.

Evointrinsic said:
If there is a bad person within any religion, then your logic is already flawed.
Click to expand...
I do not see where this is coming from. What did I write to lead you to conclude that my position is undercut by the existence of a "bad" religious person?

Evointrinsic said:
A strong religious based country may have effect on the conditions people live in, but it is ultimately the person who makes up their own mind on how to act, regardless if you are religious or not.
Click to expand...
I really doubt this - I think you are giving far too much weight to the ability of people to disentangle themselves from their environments.
 
logical bob said:
As the saying goes, atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Click to expand...
To be fair though, the atheist should not promote the idea that he or she is any less subject to unexamined dogma than the "religious" person. There is a temptation for the atheist to think that he is disencumbered by dogma, but this is an illusion. Just because a set of ideas can be neatly bundled up and named as the Christian worldview, and then possibly "adopted" uncritically by someone, does not mean that the same is not true for the atheist.

This is so even if there is no "label" to slap onto "atheist dogma" - unexamined assumptions and pre-conceptions that an atheist might have adopted.

Everybody has unexamined assumptions - its part of the nature of being a human being. To see the world, we need to "look at it" through a "worldview". Every one has a worldview, no exceptions. This does not mean that it is impossible to stand back and examine your worldview, but relatively few people are able or willing to do this.
 
Drew said:
I very much doubt it. It is simply impossible to disentangle all sorts of influences - religious ones included - from what "comes naturally". We are a product of our environment and an atheist who has grown up, say, in the USA or the UK, will have been influenced by the Christian worldview that still manifests itself in those nations in many and subtle ways.
Click to expand...

A religion WOULD influence someone if that someone actually followed it. But there are people, such as myself, that think it's all complete bunk. The only influence Christianity has on general public is a few crosses and churches, maybe a radio station. To truly be influenced by a religion you'd have to actually read it's texts, in this case the bible. I for one didnt read the bible until I was 19 and I've already been doing conservation work with endangered species as well as in 3rd world countries for 2 years before that. You arent born with knowledge of the bible and the bible is what Christians are following. That is where they get their influence from. And even then the majority of Christians haven't even read the bible. So the only influence they get is from other people, their experiences and their own mind. And in an area where I'm from, where virtually no one goes to church, or temple or what have you, and virtually no one puts up Christmas lights or goes crazy with all the decorations for Halloween even it's unlikely that within this area (which is a large area I mind you) people are going to be very influenced by religion. Not only that, But WHICH RELIGION!?!?! Some have to be better in morality than others? right? In my area we have a lot of atheists and a few Jews and a few Christians that I know of, the others I have no contact with what so ever, and even if they were jewish or christian they sure dont present it as such. It's extremely rare to see a cross anywhere or a kippah. None of those Jesus fish on the bumpers of cars. I find it very unlikely that religion is going to have virtually any effect in areas like this. Perhaps if you live in the Bible Belt of America or in a place which showboats it's general religion such as Mormons (i believe it's in Utah? correct?) and Amish Communities where religion is inescapable. But those places arent everywhere. in fact those places are shrinking (excluding the ones that are entire countries). The ONLY way I can see Religion being influential is when it's forced upon it's citizens and illegal with the penalty of death by not abiding by the rules and ways of those religions. Those are the ONLY places where religion can be influential because it's all that here is really.


Drew said:
I do not see where this is coming from. What did I write to lead you to conclude that my position is undercut by the existence of a "bad" religious person?
Click to expand...

Misinterpreted something, my mistake! :D

Drew said:
I really doubt this - I think you are giving far too much weight to the ability of people to disentangle themselves from their environments.
Click to expand...
So your saying that everyone is powerless to make their own decisions? Everyone needs to stop and think "How would Jesus/Muhammad/Krishna do it?" and then make a decision?

Yes, there are religious figures (churches, priests, crosses, Kippah's, Temples, ect.) in communities, and yes these are seemingly inescapable. But the sheer presents of them doesnt make people reflect upon them, especially if they don't believe in the teachings of those religions. I'm sure every time you have seen a Hindu Temple you instantaneously start thinking in the ways of Ganesha's teachings, just as you don't start praying to Rah every time you saw a picture of an Egyptian pyramid. It simply does not happen. You make up your own decisions as a human, not as a theist if your an atheist.
 
Drew said:
To be fair though, the atheist should not promote the idea that he or she is any less subject to unexamined dogma than the "religious" person. There is a temptation for the atheist to think that he is disencumbered by dogma, but this is an illusion. Just because a set of ideas can be neatly bundled up and named as the Christian worldview, and then possibly "adopted" uncritically by someone, does not mean that the same is not true for the atheist.

This is so even if there is no "label" to slap onto "atheist dogma" - unexamined assumptions and pre-conceptions that an atheist might have adopted.

Everybody has unexamined assumptions - its part of the nature of being a human being. To see the world, we need to "look at it" through a "worldview". Every one has a worldview, no exceptions. This does not mean that it is impossible to stand back and examine your worldview, but relatively few people are able or willing to do this.
Click to expand...

I dont think anyone is denying that Atheists shouldnt go unexamined. In fact, i've made topics that ask people to ask questions about what I believe in and all that. You are simply slandering good people with speculation such as "There is a temptation for the atheist to think that he is disencumbered by dogma" where exactly do you get off saying this? You obviously know absolutely nothing about atheism and what kind of people they are. I suggest you head over to that topic i was talking about and directly ask me instead of simply making insulting claims.

There is no "Atheist Dogma" because Atheists arent directed to follow the same thing. Do you really not understand this? or are you incapable of understanding this? There is no such thing as Atheist dogma, there is only an individuals dogma. If i say something as an atheist it does not relate to any other atheist at all unless I say "i dont believe in a god" If i said the world is a giant pancake then I, and only I believe that the world is a giant pancake. If i say i dont believe in evolution, then I and only I believe there is no such thing as evolution. It has no relation to the atheist beside me at all. I know other people on this forum realize this, but you seem to block out everything I say.

here's the link to that topic, please ask and claim whatever you'd like and I will give you an honest, personal answer. viewtopic.php?f=10&t=48009
 
You two are talking at cross purposes. I don't think Drew said or implied there was an atheist creed that we have to follow en masse. He said that we all interpret the world through the filter of our own worldview, that there is no neutral or impartial stance from which to judge other worldviews. That worldview might be unique to you and not part of any movement, but you still have it.

Drew's position is a commendably postmodern one - credit to him for showing that not all Christians are narrow absolutists. :thumb

Evoinstrinsic, as you object to atheism being portayed as a movement or a dogma would you agree that people like Dawkins, Hitchins and Harris are pretty unhelpful?

Edit for typo
 
Evointrinsic said:
A religion WOULD influence someone if that someone actually followed it. But there are people, such as myself, that think it's all complete bunk.
Click to expand...
You may well think its bunk, but I suggest that you are not accounting for the very subtle ways in which the religious history of the world you grew up in has affected you in ways that may not be discernable to you.

I am assume that, like me, you grew up somewhere in Canada. Well, whether you realize it or not, or will accept it or not, many of the values that inform our culture and our laws have a connection to the Christian wordview. For good or for bad. I really find it hard to believe that you think that the only "mode" by which Christian influence can be communicated to someone is for that someone "to have read the texts". That is an oversimplification - we are very much the product of our environments, and the Christian worldview has woven itself into (mainstream) North American culture in many subtle ways.

Its influence on you cannot be stopped by simply deciding to not read the Bible or otherwise directly become involved in the church.
 
Evointrinsic said:
Drew said:
I really doubt this - I think you are giving far too much weight to the ability of people to disentangle themselves from their environments.
Click to expand...
So your saying that everyone is powerless to make their own decisions? Everyone needs to stop and think "How would Jesus/Muhammad/Krishna do it?" and then make a decision?
Click to expand...
I am indeed suggesting that it is monumentally difficult for someone to free themselves from all their cultural and environmental influences and adopt a position that is truly "their own". I think that you over-estimate the degree to which we are "free" in this respect. Now I am not saying that it is impossible to make some progress in the area of stepping back from your cultural context to seek a more objective stance. But it is exceedingly hard to do.

And the way that our religious heritage influences us is not through people asking themselves "what would Jesus / Muhammed / Krishna do". Things are far more subtle than this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top