Your 3 main reasons

[Frosty]

You're approaching this the wrong way, theists are the claimants who are asserting god exists and they have the burden of proof, theists should be providing a reason to believe it's not the job of the atheist to disprove god.

Depends, does the atheist believe that there is no god(s), or do they not believe that there either is or is not a god(s)?

The best you can do is investigate why a the theist believes and then find the inevitable faulty logic in their thinking and address it.

I take it you haven't yet challenged Ryft to a philosophical debate about the christian god?

For the reasons listed in my previous post, I don't debate theists, if they want to offer reason or evidence to back their beliefs then fine, I will generally consider them on their merit.

It's generally pointless to debate theists, for the same reason it's generally pointless to debate people that believe in unicorns, these people are deluded and rational arguments simply aren't convincing.

"If you could reason with religious people there would be no religious people" -House.

[iamatheist]

First of thanks for the responses so far I guess, but here goes in a comprehensive response..

some of our better members are theists (Ie: Tackatack, fr0d0, and Rayaan come to my mind)

Where did I say your worst members were theists? Simply that theism can be and IS dangerous, signs of that are clear throughout history

We also have not one... but several deists, some of them being rather good members

I was addressing the two posters in the thread at the time, ONE of whom was a deist. I am fully aware of the number and diversity of members on this board.. A main reason when choosing to see what this place is all about

Again with the claiming we lack spine... how very quaint

I have already addressed this

you appear to be a copy+pasting (troll?) that is bouncing around with zero desire

...My grammar??.. jus' saying (is this really the issue here? I never said I am an english student)

with zero desire to be part of a community. Precisely why should we respond to your post if it is your intention to move on without hanging around at least a little?

Precisely why should I not want to move on given that it has been made clear by most posters here that life was better beforehand. Also does it not show some desire for community the fact that I am still around attempting to defend myself, why would I not have just unsubbed the thread and moved on. How long does this "earning trust and respect" thing take when in reality I'm here for debate not to take a position of power or look after your kids.

Frosty, You make a good point that perhaps the true value of what it is to be on this side of the fence is that despite whatever reason a theist can muster, there is always a response that is based in logic and reason.. Thankyou for the post, maybe the most interesting so far

Lilphil1989
There isn't a single demand in your quoted section of my post, note the 'maybe'. It simply reads 'maybe do this, or then again, that', quite blatantly a suggestion and at no point demanding. However, your post DEMANDS that I don't make demands... Go figure

And you wouldn't say that stalin's regime wasn't atrocious?

Of course it was, I never said ALL in my post regarding that matter.. Of course there are one hell of a lot of wrongdoings done NOT in the name of a god, but just look at The Crusades (Obvious), The holocaust (Hitler was xtian and 'jews killed his saviour dag-nabbit'), The numerous inquisitions throughout history, t palestinian/israeli conflict, Terrorism, Witch-hunts, The still raging muslim/sikh feuds and fighting, Anything Jihad, Honor killings for girls who give birth before marriage in Islam, 'Corrective rape' sometimes even by family members to cure lesbianism, Recent indonesian violence amongst muslims of different sections of the faith....Not to mention the fact the vatican condoned slavery in all its forms and until recently disregarded condoms as a stop to the spread of AIDs. Genuinely the list goes on, and the death toll in the few I have listed probably runs into the billions even with the most conservative of estimations of death tolls

In defence of my second point which you so easily refuted, I simply point you toward the in depth research done into split brain patients and the left hemispheres function to hold a persons idea, regardless of the evidence, and rationalize the evidence to suit its need. There is proof out there that what I say is true, this was not just a top-of-the-head comment.

Thirdly I mention an inflated, undeserved sense of worth. To backup this point instead of evidence (as it is a very subjective point to begin with) I shall simply compare the religious idea of life to what I see to be the more logical understanding.
Religious- god MADE me, he went out of his way to put the pieces together in such a way that I am me..Therefore I am already great, because I am made by the divine to be exactly what he planned me to be.
non-religious- I am here through a series of events set in motion 16 billion years ago. In that time scale I am only here for a very limited and insignificant amount of time. Therefore I must spend that time being the best I can and leaving an impression on those who are yet to exist otherwise what was the point

I find that in the non-religious view (obviously that is not everyone's) that the onus is on you to be the best you can, for yourself and for your species, to live on in memory and influence. Whereas, the religious view tends to be that, while not without sin, humans are exactly what god expected them to be, and therefore so long as you try to be good enough you'll live forever. Also across many religions this world is just a trial before the real goal, which I find a wholly wasteful outlook on life

Finally, thankyou THEvoid. 3 interesting reasons although could I possibly ask for more detail as I feel I may have got a bit lost in some of your sentences (yeah, I know I ramble a ridiculous amount)

[lilphil1989]

So you didn't "demand" (I would like to point out that neither did I, despite your claim).

So what?
Making suggestions as to how people should alter their behaviour to accomodate you, especially within your first few posts, is generally considered to be rather rude, as is making personal insults, hence the abruptness of replies you got from many members.
I don't think I've known anyone to make a worse first impression! However, if you're here for discussion and not just to aggravate people, then let us discuss.


All three of your reasons appear fallacious to me. The amount of atrocity commited in a given god's name has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not that god actually exists. Nor does the irrationality or self-worth of a given theist.

Myself, I need only 1 reason to be an atheist: There is no evidence to suggest that any god exists.

[iamatheist]

Point duly noted, and yes I am here for discussion
If I'm honest I don't think a first impression has ever been worse in general yet alone just on here although I still do not apologise for any wording or meaning in my posts as I feel I merely suggested a sense of decency and provoked a sensible response with a fairly accurate insight into how the original repliers were coming across. (not a personal attack on their ACTUAL personality per say)
Perhaps I wish it started differently but we are slooowly seeing the sort of comments I set out to achieve

On the topic of my first point again.. I did try to make the distinction that it was a go at 'religion' not just the religious, perhaps I should have gone on to say that while this is not a reason for atheism, it was the instigator to my questioning of my semi-religious upbringing from a surprisingly early-age and therefore manages to sneak into my own personal reasons

I also agree with you, "there is no evidence, therefore I do not believe" but that also infers an element of agnosticism or uncertainty.. Where as I am certain (relative for my own purposes, of course I am still open to evidence) that there is no God, which perhaps raises a personal question of why am I any different to an evangelical Christian in my beliefs, as I believe that not only should religion not be taught to children, the complete opposite should be true. The dangers of blindly following any idea should be instilled from an early age and perhaps we could bring about a truly questioning society that cultivates scientific proof and neglects idle belief in ANYTHING. All the way from god through to the matrix being real
These are the sort of conversations I am after

[Violet]

Where did I say your worst members were theists? Simply that theism can be and IS dangerous, signs of that are clear throughout history

Fact is that science can be an IS dangerous, signs of that are clear throughout history.

I was addressing the two posters in the thread at the time, ONE of whom was a deist. I am fully aware of the number and diversity of members on this board.. A main reason when choosing to see what this place is all about

There are other boards with far more people in them (and of course that means much more diverse probably).

...My grammar??.. jus' saying (is this really the issue here? I never said I am an english student)

I absolutely could not make sense of the first sentence in that quoted portion. Hence my comment about it being difficult.

Precisely why should I not want to move on given that it has been made clear by most posters here that life was better beforehand. Also does it not show some desire for community the fact that I am still around attempting to defend myself, why would I not have just unsubbed the thread and moved on. How long does this "earning trust and respect" thing take when in reality I'm here for debate not to take a position of power or look after your kids.

It does indeed show some desire to do so, although this would be far clearer if you posted in other threads as well. Observe that Holubice (a new guy) only posts in his introduction thread... he really doesn't seem to be here for the community, but to simply preach. It really isn't apparent that you are not similar to the likes of him when you behave not dissimilarly (instead of preaching you could simply be here to argue). My recommendation is to post in other threads as well, especially an introduction thread

And you wouldn't say that stalin's regime wasn't atrocious?

Of course it was, I never said ALL in my post regarding that matter.. Of course there are one hell of a lot of wrongdoings done NOT in the name of a god, but just look at The Crusades (Obvious), The holocaust (Hitler was xtian and 'jews killed his saviour dag-nabbit'), The numerous inquisitions throughout history, t palestinian/israeli conflict, Terrorism, Witch-hunts, The still raging muslim/sikh feuds and fighting, Anything Jihad, Honor killings for girls who give birth before marriage in Islam, 'Corrective rape' sometimes even by family members to cure lesbianism, Recent indonesian violence amongst muslims of different sections of the faith....Not to mention the fact the vatican condoned slavery in all its forms and until recently disregarded condoms as a stop to the spread of AIDs. Genuinely the list goes on, and the death toll in the few I have listed probably runs into the billions even with the most conservative of estimations of death tolls

Stalin was an atheist that did things most people deem evil, infact he had anti-religious policies. As it turns out, 'horrible' things are done by people (not religion). I see no reason to presume that because people joined together under 'banner X' that it was in any way 'banner X' which should be charged with what was done.

Take the Spanish inquisition for example. Sure, the reasons that people performed it might well have been religious, but the religion itself tortured/killed not a single person. Disguising the darkness that people can sink into by claiming it was religion that is responsible is quite mad as I see things

In defence of my second point which you so easily refuted, I simply point you toward the in depth research done into split brain patients and the left hemispheres function to hold a persons idea, regardless of the evidence, and rationalize the evidence to suit its need. There is proof out there that what I say is true, this was not just a top-of-the-head comment.

Proof also is subjective. Note that science is an intersubjective practice. It appears to be verifiable by at least many of us, and it is this (likely) which you were referring to when you speak of evidence. It is not evidence that you are looking for therefore... but scientific evidence. The same holds true for 'proof', where the type you would likely seek is 'logical proof' or even 'proven by testing'.

It is a great mistake to seek unspecified evidence. Hence my refutation, for your argument is poorly worded in spite of its intent.

Thirdly I mention an inflated, undeserved sense of worth. To backup this point instead of evidence (as it is a very subjective point to begin with) I shall simply compare the religious idea of life to what I see to be the more logical understanding.
Religious- god MADE me, he went out of his way to put the pieces together in such a way that I am me..Therefore I am already great, because I am made by the divine to be exactly what he planned me to be.

non-religious- I am here through a series of events set in motion 16 billion years ago. In that time scale I am only here for a very limited and insignificant amount of time. Therefore I must spend that time being the best I can and leaving an impression on those who are yet to exist otherwise what was the point

Worth is decided individually, what appears to be inflated and undeserved to you is quite diminutive and as a result of accomplishment to others. Both of you are correct, as worth is subjective.

'God' doesn't go out of 'His' way when 'He' is the way and all things are as a result of his 'plan'. If 'God' made everything: everything has the worth of having been made by 'God'. The self often already being a highly valued, this gains an added value still of having been made by 'God'. The religious person, valuing 'God' quite highly, then can reasonably say that they are worth a great deal. Add that 'God' has a plan for them, and this can explode into an extremely high value of self.

The non-religious example is very community oriented. Some of us don't care about what impression we leave: those ones care only about doing what it is they want. Why always do the best one can? I don't always do the best I can, most things aren't worth it to me. The time in which I am here is not insignificant to me and does not feel particularly limited, and I have a very high value of myself. You presume oddly that there is a point to living. The point is what you declare it. Naught more

I find that in the non-religious view (obviously that is not everyone's) that the onus is on you to be the best you can, for yourself and for your species, to live on in memory and influence. Whereas, the religious view tends to be that, while not without sin, humans are exactly what god expected them to be, and therefore so long as you try to be good enough you'll live forever. Also across many religions this world is just a trial before the real goal, which I find a wholly wasteful outlook on life

It's a wasteful outlook on life to have a goal and to try to accomplish it?

Finally, thankyou THEvoid. 3 interesting reasons although could I possibly ask for more detail as I feel I may have got a bit lost in some of your sentences (yeah, I know I ramble a ridiculous amount)

His reasons are actually very good ones. If you spend much time here you'll learn precisely what he means in time

[thesummerqueen]

[yawn]

[Doubting Thomas]

1. Perhaps most obviously and maybe a cop-out, i start with the atrocities undertaken in the name of a deity. This is fairly obvious and needs no reasoning, however i will explain that while this is my main argument against religion it is not necessarily an argument against the religious at large

Those people aren't/weren't true Christians.

2. My second being an idea springing from the dark ages, so called because of the lack of intelligent thought to come out of that era, provoked not wholly but mainly by the fear of going against the rulings and laws of the church for fear of imprisonment or worse yet an ETERNITY of damnation in a literal "yes its underneath you" hell. And is basically the drag-factor on moral, scientific and social understanding of the world around us.. the tendency for a religious person to disregard evidence of anything that makes their 'god' seem less likely

Satan caused the dark ages while the church tried to preserve their way of life, much like today.

3. My final point in my "top 3" would have to be the undeserved sense of worth that religion encourages, self worth comes from achievements in life, and I don't mean your first steps or any other meaningless task in the grand scheme of things... A perfect human would use the limit of his intellect and the entirety of the time possible that he has to further the species, solve issues and better the lives of those around him near and far... And while religion teaches this, there is a constant double standard that they must better your life by engaging you in battle (whether metaphorically or literally) and CHANGING it

It doesn't matter what kind of achievements you have in life, all that matters is accepting the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior in order to not be sent to hell in the afterlife.

I guess I've been debating too much with Christians or reading too many of their lame arguments, but these are the likely rebuttals. You're not going to change any Christian's mind with arguments such as these, so why try? Even when faced with hard evidence that Jesus likely didn't exist, there's no evidence that God exists, or inconsistencies/inaccuracies in the bible, they always come up with some ad hoc argument to explain it away. That's one reason I dumped religion, because I realized that I kept having to come up with explanations in order to quell my cognitive dissonance whenever a serious question about religion came up. But I think most Christians don't have a problem doing that.

[orogenicman]

[quote='Doubting Thomas' pid='128713' dateline='1303140214']
[quote]

It doesn't matter what kind of achievements you have in life, all that matters is accepting the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior in order to not be sent to hell in the afterlife.

I guess I've been debating too much with Christians or reading too many of their lame arguments, but these are the likely rebuttals. You're not going to change any Christian's mind with arguments such as these, so why try? Even when faced with hard evidence that Jesus likely didn't exist, there's no evidence that God exists, or inconsistencies/inaccuracies in the bible, they always come up with some ad hoc argument to explain it away. That's one reason I dumped religion, because I realized that I kept having to come up with explanations in order to quell my cognitive dissonance whenever a serious question about religion came up. But I think most Christians don't have a problem doing that.
[/quote]

Lewis Black once said "I'd truly love to believe that the world was created in seven days - - - but I have thoughts. And we all know that thoughts can fuck up the faith thing. Ask any Catholic priest!"

[iamatheist]

Those people aren't/weren't true Christians.

For a start, who sanctioned most of this.. The pope
Second of all yet again I will point out this was an argument against religion.. as in any group of people united under a doctrine. I feel that the excuse that their 'religion' gives these people is one of the strongest arguments against organised religion out there. Although I will take on board Aerzia Saerules Arktuos's point here that bad things are done by bad people not the banner they run under.. However, perhaps these people would not have found the widespread support they did were it not for such a banner. Also, religion can sometimes be involved for different reasons, regardless of say...hitler being religious or not, he targeted (albeit a race also) but the religion of judaism.. Would they have been such an easy target for him had there not been a belief difference, and therefore an inherent suspicion of the age to target upon?

[yawn]

Come to an atheist debate forum and find atheist debate boring, you lost?

[thesummerqueen]

When did you register, sweet pea? Ah. Okay.

When you go back and check my post count, maybe you'll reconsider what I find "boring."