I am a new here, but I have been a part of several atheist forums in the past. I have read a lot of articles recently, and I have noticed a new trend, if you will. Theists who do not directly attack atheism but point their objections somewhere else. So here are a few things I have heard:

1. Religion is the foundation of society.
This argument essentially goes along the lines of "Religion created civilization so it must stay". They claim that religion bound people together in the past and that is what created settlements. They argue that we must preserve religion to continue the cohesion of people.
They also argue that their church is a productive community and that atheism is somehow against such behavior.

2. Religion is the foundation of morality
This tired all argument has manifested itself in many ways. So they claim that all religions have a set of rules and they are all similar, therefore religion is the source of human "laws". They argue that religion enforced or created the laws that held early communities, as described above. So religion must be preserved to guide humans into the future.

3. (Continuation of 2) Science (or atheists) cannot tell us right from wrong.
I am not sure why they think atheists have to be aware of science, but they claim subjective morality is wrong and inhumane.

4. Religion made history.
This is not necessarily an argument against atheism, but they claim that atheists are not aware of religion and the role it plays in society so atheists cannot have a full understanding of history.

I want to hear your thoughts on these arguments. I am an atheist myself, just want to see what you guys have to say!

Hello and welcome! your welcome cake is in the hide tag



1) nonsense. Religion is not in any way needed for a civilization to exist. What bound people together is agriculture.

2) more nonsense, and tired nonsense at that. Morality is not derived from religion. Religious people use their already existing moral compass to decide which part of the bible/quran/whatever are moral rules and which are 'metaphors' or 'allegories'. When people stop believing, they don't go off on murdering sprees. The source of morality is empathy.

3) science doesn't say what's right or wrong, because science doesn't deal with that. It's not interested in it.
Objective morality doesn't exist; it is not demonstrable. All morality that exists is subjective.

4) I don't quite understand what you mean. Could you elaborate?

If you mean that historical records exist because of religion, that's just not true. And if you mean that religion has somehow contributed to society across the ages.....well, the Enlightenment takes care of that claim.

Enjoy your stay!

As a child,i was terrified of the wrath of Jesus.
My mother told me that i'd be punished after i die and i'd suffer eternally in hell if i did something wrong. xD

So,i'd be lying if i said that religion didn't have any role in making me act good in my childhood days,that is,atleast out of fear.

(July 4, 2015 at 4:40 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Hello and welcome! your welcome cake is in the hide tag

---

---

1) nonsense. Religion is not in any way needed for a civilization to exist. What bound people together is agriculture.

2) more nonsense, and tired nonsense at that. Morality is not derived from religion. Religious people use their already existing moral compass to decide which part of the bible/quran/whatever are moral rules and which are 'metaphors' or 'allegories'. When people stop believing, they don't go off on murdering sprees. The source of morality is empathy.

3) science doesn't say what's right or wrong, because science doesn't deal with that. It's not interested in it.
Objective morality doesn't exist; it is not demonstrable. All morality that exists is subjective.

4) I don't quite understand what you mean. Could you elaborate?

If you mean that historical records exist because of religion, that's just not true. And if you mean that religion has somehow contributed to society across the ages.....well, the Enlightenment takes care of that claim.

Enjoy your stay!

Oh sorry for not being clear. #4 was referring to how religion changed history. The theistic claim is that atheists do not have a good understanding of religion, are ignorant of it, therefore they will never understand human history properly. They say an understanding of religion is important for studying and interpreting history, especially ancient history.
They also calim religion has a historic validity, which you alluded to in your post!

Thank you for your welcome. It is nice to have a like mided community, unlike youtube which is filled with trolls, loud mouths, stupid people and more trolls!

Huh, never heard that one before. I think it has nothing to do with atheism or religion, but saying atheists are historically ignorant because they're atheists is completely illogical and, well, strange. Religion changed history? Sure, it had an impact on it, but so did atheism, hence my reference to the enlightenment.

Ha....YouTube comments. That's one swamp you don't want to get sucked into, friend
There's plenty more decent discussion to be had here

(July 4, 2015 at 4:41 pm)pool Wrote: As a child,i was terrified of the wrath of Jesus.
My mother told me that i'd be punished after i die and i'd suffer eternally in hell if i did something wrong. xD

So,i'd be lying if i said that religion didn't have any role in making me act good in my childhood days,that is,atleast out of fear.

Maybe it affected your actions by making you fear punishment, but it had little to no impact on what you perceive to be right or wrong. Unless you do think stoning cheating spouses is the right thing to do.

The best response is to tell them to blow Jesus out of their ass.

1. Religion is the foundation of society.
Of a society full of people that blindly accepts everything the religious leader say to them without questioning, no matter how ridiculous the orders are as if they were slaves that were unable to even recognise their state.

2. Religion is the foundation of morality.
Not at all. Morality comes from the need to make an organised society which might or might not have a religious belief.

3. (Continuation of 2) Science (or atheists) cannot tell us right from wrong.
Science can't tell us what's wrong and what's right, but many atheists are able to tell you what they believe to be right and wrong. It's something that really depends on each person's definition of good or bad. Most atheists would use their rationality to define their morals, usually believing that hipocrisy and injustice are both wrong. Maybe even intolerance if they're enough open-minded.

4. Religion made history.
Of course it did! Most people are Christians, it's obvious this belief system is going to have a great focus on history books. Even in the science history we can say that religion had it's participation by... What? Hiding knowledge from the whole population and even burning books that could've advanced today's knowledge?

1.  Bullshit

2.  More bullshit

3.  That is not science's job.

4.  There was plenty of history before jesusism reared its ugly head and there will be plenty of history when jesusism sinks into the dustbin of history.

Earlier religions tended to be more tolerant than the monotheistic shit we get from christards and allah's butt-sniffers.

(July 4, 2015 at 4:52 pm)TheMonster Wrote: The theistic claim is that atheists do not have a good understanding of religion, are ignorant of it, therefore they will never understand human history properly. They say an understanding of religion is important for studying and interpreting history, especially ancient history.

My experience suggests exactly the opposite, particularly for Christians. Most Christians I've met are painfully ignorant of the history of the church. Throw in a dash of David Barton and you have a significant number of Christians believing a version of history that is not only demonstrably false, but intentionally distorted to give their beliefs more significance than they actually merit.