Atheism and Anti-Theism same thing?

[Excited Penguin]

You have to keep in mind that no one is to blame here. It is what it is. We have to get rid of it though. I'm so sick of fucking people thinking religion will stick around forever. That is precisely why it might.

I hope it won't, and I will oppose anything that may help it stick around forever, but it must be understood that religiosity began as an unavoidable (or avoid-and-die) force of nature in our species. It may be an important reason why Homo Sapiens managed to out-live, or (more probably) kill off competing species of human such as Neanderthalensis, who you probably would not want as your neighbors today. People evolved to consider and voice questions regarding their existence and their place in the universe, and some among them evolved (some by hook and by crook, but they evolved) to be the sort who provide answers. It probably wasn't Terry Pratchett who first observed that a lie can go around the world before the truth can get its boots on, which couldn't be more the truth, just as it was with the answers which the first religious generations got for their questions. The problem is that most people prefer being lied to, when they are lies which simplify their lives.

As atheists and anti-theists on this site, there's very little in terms of action  which we could be united to work together on, and building stable kingdoms at the expense of non-sequitors and other, smaller groups is what eventually made it possible for humanity to re-evaluate the earlier answers which they were given, seek better ones, bring about inevitable civil wars and political terror over them, and all that was before anybody once even considered p-u-b-l-i-c-l-y evaluating the questions scientifically! The mobilization of minds which were made alike through religion is what built the foundations which eventually led to our ability to sip coffee and communicate via laptop or smaller, wireless devices today. Now here we are, awakened, but we don't even agree enough on whether theism should be actively opposed. We have traded the power of easy group rallying power which religious leaders and ideological leaders have for our intellectual honesty, and although this makes us better people, it puts us in a position which has not yet come to be politically advantageous with our species.

It is only now that the population has swelled to overwhelming numbers that our world is much too small for our lives to remain sustainable with continued discord over nonsensical religious ideas, and that our only chance that the majority of our species has of surviving for more than another decade or two into the future is through scientific progress, which we all need to collaborate on. This is why I am anti-theist. The ideas of theists can be quite dumb, but religion as a force which may be etched in our very biology is an idea to be considered with respect. Just because its wrong, which it is, does not make it an issue to be dismissed lightly, nor to be expected to vanish overnight - know your enemy, and be patient in dealing with it!

Whatever, dude.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

I hope it won't, and I will oppose anything that may help it stick around forever, but it must be understood that religiosity began as an unavoidable (or avoid-and-die) force of nature in our species. It may be an important reason why Homo Sapiens managed to out-live, or (more probably) kill off competing species of human such as Neanderthalensis, who you probably would not want as your neighbors today. People evolved to consider and voice questions regarding their existence and their place in the universe, and some among them evolved (some by hook and by crook, but they evolved) to be the sort who provide answers. It probably wasn't Terry Pratchett who first observed that a lie can go around the world before the truth can get its boots on, which couldn't be more the truth, just as it was with the answers which the first religious generations got for their questions. The problem is that most people prefer being lied to, when they are lies which simplify their lives.

As atheists and anti-theists on this site, there's very little in terms of action  which we could be united to work together on, and building stable kingdoms at the expense of non-sequitors and other, smaller groups is what eventually made it possible for humanity to re-evaluate the earlier answers which they were given, seek better ones, bring about inevitable civil wars and political terror over them, and all that was before anybody once even considered p-u-b-l-i-c-l-y evaluating the questions scientifically! The mobilization of minds which were made alike through religion is what built the foundations which eventually led to our ability to sip coffee and communicate via laptop or smaller, wireless devices today. Now here we are, awakened, but we don't even agree enough on whether theism should be actively opposed. We have traded the power of easy group rallying power which religious leaders and ideological leaders have for our intellectual honesty, and although this makes us better people, it puts us in a position which has not yet come to be politically advantageous with our species.

It is only now that the population has swelled to overwhelming numbers that our world is much too small for our lives to remain sustainable with continued discord over nonsensical religious ideas, and that our only chance that the majority of our species has of surviving for more than another decade or two into the future is through scientific progress, which we all need to collaborate on. This is why I am anti-theist. The ideas of theists can be quite dumb, but religion as a force which may be etched in our very biology is an idea to be considered with respect. Just because its wrong, which it is, does not make it an issue to be dismissed lightly, nor to be expected to vanish overnight - know your enemy, and be patient in dealing with it!

Whatever, dude.

Ok, Bart!

[Ivan Denisovich]

I'm not going to lie, I laughed reading this. Overdramatic much? Honestly, indoctrinating children into believing a religion is no different than indoctrinating them to be Republican or Democrat (assuming we're talking about your average Christian family who goes to church once a week but otherwise doesn't do much religious activity.)

Do parents really indoctrinate children into being Republican or Democrat? If so neither of these things should be done, though sadly we can't do much about this. Also I would say there is a difference as being Democrat or Republican is about real world issues even if distorted by bias, religion is just selling cure to imaginary illness.

Also, I was one of those children - I'm not upset about it at all. My mother is Catholic, I was raised Catholic. We went to church every Sunday, I attended religion school to prepare me for communion and confirmation. I hated going to it, but I didn't hate it because "AGH I'M IN AN ANTI-INTELLECTUAL PRISON FUCK THIS RELIGIOUS OPPRESSION!!" I hated it in the same way I hated going to school. Otherwise it didn't bother me much. And then when I reached a certain age I decided I didn't believe any of it and that was that. Not a big deal in my opinion.

I too was one of those children and I'm upset about this as I value my freedom highly and I do not appreciate it being taken away from me. I managed to throw of shackles of indoctrination but it would be better if I weren't forced to do this in the first place.

You not being upset does not mean much. Others could be. Regardless they are still robbed of freedom to choice, or if not robbed then manipulated to choose one true way.

I cannot understand how an institution like religion can cause so much harm to society when its core belief is to help.

I doubt that it's core belief is to help. Maybe help clergy in grabbing more money and power. And I would say that this wanting to help is main issue as not everyone need such help, which religion with it's pretensions is incapable of understanding. Also greatest crimes were made in name of aiding, i.e. helping Volk in taking lebensraum or world proletariat in throwing shackles of bourgeois. Religion with it's soul saving service also have much to answer for.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

Are parents that make their children eat their vegetables child abusers?

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Are parents that make their children eat their vegetables child abusers?

Arguably, forcing something which children don't like down their throats is invariably the poorest way to encourage a lifetime of healthy eating habits. If a kid will eat some vegetables but not others, his preferences should be respected as long as he has at least sampled what he rejects. The human genome is subject to variant food allergies, and some simply cannot eat mushrooms, some cannot eat broccoli, just as some cannot eat peanuts without getting sick. Not that I advocate my sister's approach, who indulged her kid's demand for mac n' cheese almost every night until they were at least 12.

Also, the benefits to children of eating healthy meals complete with vegetables is universally undisputed. Teaching children of a powerful Mafia-don god who demands worship and tribute, or he will torture you for ever and ever...not so much!