Can Atheism become corrupt like religion?

[robvalue]

Yeah, I'm sick and tired of these fucking atheists with their nit picking and their giant inflatable kraken and their rejection of everything and their fluffy green hair and their bastard manifesto.

It's time we stood up to ourselves people.

[LastPoet]

Yep, those damn atheist scum should all hang. Bored now 3/10 for the effort of the troll. Yawn.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

How terribly dull.

[LastPoet]

Yeah, I'm sick and tired of these fucking atheists with their nit picking and their giant inflatable kraken and their rejection of everything and their fluffy green hair and their bastard manifesto.

It's time we stood up to ourselves people.

Bold mine.

So, you mean Cthulhu, or something else?

[downbeatplumb]

You don't lose your job as a scientist of you're not atheist. That's a stupid lie.

And no, people haven't changed since the 1400s, only the culture. If atheism were to be instituted as a forced state doctrine, it would be similarly harmful and corrupted as other imposed ideologies. That's why no progressive atheist wants an atheist state. Most of us are secularists who want a state which allows the free exercise of religion for everyone equally within certain reasonable bounds.

I 100% agree with you. But many of my theist friends feel threatened that Atheism will become the new dogma the new religion (yes I know its not a religion, but good luck trying to convince a theist). 

In their eyes, if government forces you to "not believe in X" than that's like N.Korea (an atheist nation) saying Kim Jun Un is your overlord Master.

See you can have reasonable views.


Keep it up.

[robvalue]

Yeah, I'm sick and tired of these fucking atheists with their nit picking and their giant inflatable kraken and their rejection of everything and their fluffy green hair and their bastard manifesto.

It's time we stood up to ourselves people.

Bold mine.

So, you mean Cthulhu, or something else?

I'm pretty sure he would be in there somewhere yeah. That could be him! I was just randomly going through my cupboard to see what kind of things these atheists have.

[Mudhammam]

Scientists rely on outside funding so usually they have to work in a paradigm that is proven fruitful. It has nothing to do with going against an "atheist status quo," whatever the hell that is supposed to mean since science is neither atheistic or religious. It has to do with research in areas that others believe will be worth investing in.

[Brian37]

Once you ad "ism" to any political or religious or business view the "ism" can grow to become political and without an anti monopoly concept to keep it on a leash ANY of those aspects of life can become abusive.

---

"isms" do not change the fact we still stem from the same evolutionary past, and labels will never automatically determine if that individual will always do good and never harm others.

[Faith No More]

I think someone has been watching dishonest Ben Stein documentaries.

[nihilistcat]

I'm curious to find out if most atheists hate the 'ancient alien' theory because it goes against "evolution" dogma of Atheism.

According to Darwin's theory, it should have taken humans millions of years to evolve to the intelligent species that we are today.

Here's my issue: and why I think 21st century Atheism is no different than 14th century Catholicism dictatorship. In the 14th century if you said the earth might not be the centre of the universe "you'd be hanged on the stake". In the 21st century if you say the universe might of been created by intelligent design 'you're career is over and you'd be labelled as a quack".

Meanwhile, in the 14th century. Hidden from public attention a small group of mathmatecians and scientist were secretley trying to figure out how the universe worked and prayed that they didn't get caught trying to do something blasphemous like going against the 'status quo". Same thing in the 21st century "theist scientists and even agnostic scientists" must surely be secretley be in the closet trying to figure out "the status quo tells me 'Do not look there, there is nothing to see there", but I feel they are wrong".

Today, as a scientist. If you so dare go against the 'status quo' of Atheism you lose your job.

So what's the flaw? Atheism is slowly but surely becoming a cult-following, within a hundred years a hierarchy council will be formed similar to the catholic/jewdaism/islam councils. And future scientists trying to disprove the 'status quo' that evolution created humanity will be burnt to the stake and witch hunted (figuratively speaking). Why will they be witch hunted? You're average atheists could care less if someone is researching 'intelligent design', but the hierarchy of the new Atheism in elitists in power will feel threatened.

Do you feel - Atheism is slowly going to become corrupt like religions? Scientists will not be permitted to look into 'supernatural' or 'mistisism' and try to find a scientific reasoning - as it would be deemed blasphemy and heretic as an Atheist society.

In the sense that atheism can become just as tribalistic as religiosity, I'd agree with this idea ... but that doesn't seem to be what you're saying. Quite frankly, I'm surprised that as a scientist, you're saying what I think you're saying. 

Science, by necessity really, can only investigate natural causes for different phenomena (like the origins of life). Biological evolution is supported by millions of pieces of fossil evidence, dating back over 3 billion years. I'm not a working scientist (I'm an attorney), but I do have a masters degree in molecular biology, and so I've studied genetics and bioinformatics, and the "genetic" evidence supporting biological evolution is also very strong. 

Moreover, equating atheism (a minority view held by maybe 10% of the US population, a group considered the "most distrusted" group in America, with virtually no political influence) with 14th century Catholicism (a majority view at the time, held by virtually its entire host population, and enforced by state violence) is somewhere between laughable and kooky paranoia.  

Francis Collins, the head of the NIH (the geneticist responsible for directing the construction of the genome project) is a Christian (who believes in intelligent design). But you cannot test or calculate the probability of magical claims. You either believe in some sort of supernatural agency or you don't, but those who do are not laughed out of science (I had plenty of religious friends who went to earn their PhD in molecular biology). Sure, if you were to say something like, I'm going to conduct an experiment to try and support the idea of intelligent design, most people in the scientific community (and beyond) would certainly be skeptical, but only because the idea is ridiculous. If you could test for magic, then it's no longer magical, if you could test for supernatural phenomena, it's no longer supernatural. And if it's no longer supernatural, then it's not GOD (it's just a natural phenomena that we didn't yet understand).