Religious people have you ever tried praying?

[jstrodel]

Nice to see you think I'm not a "serious atheist", whatever that is. By the way, I am in a university right now. I'm not socially active enough to tell you whether or not people are doing what you say they are. A couple people have gotten drunk a few times and I think one person (who I have only met once) may smoke weed. I can't think of any sex being had. I don't know how many people at my school are atheists, but...isn't that the stereotype for everyone in college? I mean, who ever said that it was only atheists who did all of that? I thought it was "oh those college students", not "oh those atheist college students".

Yes, I think that is true that it is true of most college students. You can be a serious atheist if you like.

A lot of things are condemned by Christianity, like contraception, abortion, gay marriage, the mere existance of atheists, etc.
I should note that the double ban on contraception and abortion whole thing confuses me. If they wanted there to be less abortions, then shouldn't the ability to prevent said unwanted pregnancies be made easier (i.e. promote contraception)?

I think a lot of Christians want to teach abstinence. The Catholics are more opposed to contraception than the tradition I am from, I don't remember anyone ever telling me it was a sin to use contraception.

What do you mean by this?

I think that many atheists are not atheists because they have exhaustively studied science and theology and realized that there was no God, I think it more like a mixture of people having doubts and disappointments with God and instead of looking deeper or giving God the benefit of the doubt, they make a choice simultaneously to accept the prevailing norms of drinking, secular culture and promiscuity/being sexually active and to see a greater merit in atheistic arguments then theistic. My contention is that these do not happen independently of one another, and that deconversion is not only a matter of changing beliefs about God it is a matter of accepting a much more risky and hedonistic lifestyle.

That said, I know there are some atheists who accept atheism purely on intellectual grounds independent of any carnal benefit it may give them. Perhaps you are one of these people. I don't mean to accuse anyone, but I know many of the other kind, people that slowly drift away and find ways of justifying behavior patterns that feel good to them.

[Darkstar]

I think that many atheists are not atheists because they have exhaustively studied science and theology and realized that there was no God,

Some are, but I'm not an example of that. I would think most aren't. It just kind of occured to me one day that I had no reason to believe in god. It was only after the fact that I decided to do research to see what I could come up with and I didn't find any convincing arguments.

I think it more like a mixture of people having doubts and disappointments with God and instead of looking deeper or giving God the benefit of the doubt, they make a choice simultaneously to accept the prevailing norms of drinking, secular culture and promiscuity/being sexually active and to see a greater merit in atheistic arguments then theistic. My contention is that these do not happen independently of one another, and that deconversion is not only a matter of changing beliefs about God it is a matter of accepting a much more risky and hedonistic lifestyle.

I can only speak for myself, but at the very least, I am nnot an example of this.

That said, I know there are some atheists who accept atheism purely on intellectual grounds independent of any carnal benefit it may give them. Perhaps you are one of these people. I don't mean to accuse anyone, but I know many of the other kind, people that slowly drift away and find ways of justifying behavior patterns that feel good to them.

I don't think the non-existence of god is in and of itself justification for anything. The bible says a number of things (among them that gays should die, and that atheists are the scum of the earth) which I find disagreeable.

Even if there were a god, I wouldn't consider him morally infalliable simply because he said so. I have a feeling that your view may simply be a stereotype (though it may be true in some cases), just as you would disagree with the notion that people only become relgious because they're scared of dying, or that Christians only do good things to avoid hell (which are unfair generalizations).

I could also debate whether premarital sex, etc. = hedonism. I also think it is possible to do some of these things in a responsible way that would be minimally damaging (though many people fail miserably at it...).

[jstrodel]

Not all atheists fall into the above category, but a lot do. I used to be an atheist. I've known plenty of them. I think a compassionate approach to advocacy for the atheist position is to realize that you are not only selling people an idea of more pure approach to thinking about the world, you are telling them that they are free to do whatever they want, or at least severely weakening any theological distance between them and carnality.

[Darkstar]

Not all atheists fall into the above category, but a lot do. I used to be an atheist. I've known plenty of them. I think a compassionate approach to advocacy for the atheist position is to realize that you are not only selling people an idea of more pure approach to thinking about the world, you are telling them that they are free to do whatever they want, or at least severely weakening any theological distance between them and carnality.

Theological distance, yes. There is such a thing as secular morality, and it's kind of important. So, about this carnality (real or imagined) if (and only if) it isn't hurting anyone, then why is it a bad thing? (If it is jurting someone, then the reason is obvious. Difference here is that you can't argue that things can hurt the soul, unless of course you are talking about psychological damage in some way).

[Esquilax]

Not all atheists fall into the above category, but a lot do. I used to be an atheist. I've known plenty of them. I think a compassionate approach to advocacy for the atheist position is to realize that you are not only selling people an idea of more pure approach to thinking about the world, you are telling them that they are free to do whatever they want, or at least severely weakening any theological distance between them and carnality.

Whoa, whoa: hold up, there. Free to do whatever we want? No, and I think you knew that before you typed the sentence. Atheism has a very detailed explanation for why we have morality and the uses thereof on a personal and sociological level (well, evolution and sociology does, but this atheist will patiently explain it if asked.). It is you theists that believe that people need to be taught what's right and wrong, and then constantly threatened or wheedled into behaving correctly. And that stuff about carnality... what's the real world harm of that, when done with care? Absent an immortal soul, what is the actual inherent harm in sex (for the purposes of argument, say safe sex that leads not to pregnancy or disease. We both know those things are bad, but religion takes issue with sex in general, not just the consequences of doing it unsafely.)

I think the problem here is that, when you think of the atheist position, you don't go far enough. You're still considering atheism through the lens of your religious beliefs; you can't see a way by which one can reach a moral setup without god, and therefore you don't think atheists can. But from an atheist setup, we can and have. You think carnality is bad because your god says so, but from an atheist position that god doesn't exist, and therefore the inherent immorality of sex is nonexistent.

If you are going to attempt a representation of atheism, at least be accurate in doing so.

[jstrodel]

Whoa, whoa: hold up, there. Free to do whatever we want? No, and I think you knew that before you typed the sentence. Atheism has a very detailed explanation for why we have morality and the uses thereof on a personal and sociological level (well, evolution and sociology does, but this atheist will patiently explain it if asked.). It is you theists that believe that people need to be taught what's right and wrong, and then constantly threatened or wheedled into behaving correctly. And that stuff about carnality... what's the real world harm of that, when done with care?

No it doesn't. Atheism gives people a lot of competing theories which disagree with each other about morality. Many atheists will flat out say that there is no objective morality. Other atheists will claim that there is but develop different systems. The reality is that atheists have different opinions about what is moral. You can see an example of this on this forum, where you see a post about a guy who "doesn't see what the big deal is with his dad being a cocaine addict"[/. Another person questioned "whether child molesting was wrong". You see, atheists disagree about the nature of ethics. Atheists are in agreement that atheists are ethical people. This is not the hardest thing in the world to agree on. What they do not agree on is what makes a person ethical.

Your use of the term atheism is inconsistent with other theists who insist that atheism is only the absence of belief and not a specific cultural movement related to secular political advocacy. I agree with you that atheism is not merely the absence of belief it is a specific culture.

I think the problem here is that, when you think of the atheist position, you don't go far enough. You're still considering atheism through the lens of your religious beliefs; you can't see a way by which one can reach a moral setup without god, and therefore you don't think atheists can. But from an atheist setup, we can and have.

"We can and have". You mean, after considering ethics you have come to contradictory views that are essentially irreconcilable and that leave the person with the views with absolutely no way of comparing one view against another view or discerning which are correct. I would call this a process of forming opinions.

You think carnality is bad becase your god says so, but from an atheist position that god doesn't exist, and therefore the inherent immorality of sex is nonexistent.

No, I think that carnality is bad because of a set of reasons that God has observed in deciding the action is wrong. Sexual immorality is wrong because it produces unwanted children, it leaves mothers with children they cannot take care of, sometimes devastating the rest of the womens life, the children cannot support themselves, there is substantial risk for transmitting disease, it leads to a society in which marriage is not valued, women are devalued and not taken care of, children are raised in environments which parents are split, there is much higher divorce and the social organization of the family is severely undermined which leads to many other social and economic consequences (because much is tied to the organization of the family). I think of sexuality as being a metaphor for life, and it is an extremely deep and complicated thing.

Condoms are not effective to the degree that would be necessary to effectively prevent pregnancies over a long time. I have personally had condoms break. When you add in the typical factors of alchohol, rushed decision making and other crazy life factors that surround the use of contraception, in real world factors, the only foolproof way to stop pregnancy is abstinence. You might say, if use a condom every single time, there is only a 1% chance that the condom may break or you are too drunk to stop yourself from using a condom or something crazy happens . Well, that means if you have sex 100 times that is as likely as happening as not happening.

Look around you. How many people do you know that have unwanted kids? Probably a decent number. You can quote me this statistic and that statistic about these hypothetical situations in which if you do this that and the other thing you won't get pregnant. The reality is that there are still people all around that did this that and the other thing and something else happened and now they are pregnant, and they brought a life into the world and can't take care of it.

When you consider the fact that people nowadays are so wicked and perverse in their hearts that they will think it is ok to kill their own children to enable them to have fun and get away with it. That is where your atheist ethics take you. Abortion - "well, that is something atheists disagree about". Sex before marriage? No problem. A responsible thing to do would be, since you are creating the possibility of life when you are about to have sex, you should see the act of sex as placing a certain risk on your potential child. If you are a moral person, this will significantly affect your decision making. If you are a twisted, psuedo-philosophical atheist, what you will do is just accommodate your ethics to your lifestyle preferences, say it is ok to have sex and ok to have abortions. You can do that, but it is despicable, and God will judge you for it.

If you are going to attempt a representation of atheism, at least be accurate in doing so.

Where was I inaccurate?

[EGross]

How many priests does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

One - the lightbulb is too small to hold more than him and the 10-year old.

[rexbeccarox]

Atheism is a political movement that has, in the last 40 years, relied heavily on drugs and sexual immorality to recruit followers. This is a fact, if you deny this, you are lying. If that is the sort of politics you want to be apart of and you believe that is the moral high ground, that is up to you, but that is a fact.

Huh. These guys are Christians...

The Children of God, a.k.a. The Family


















***WARNING: MAJOR NTS AHEAD***

I see this went ignored. jstrodel, thoughts?

[Esquilax]

I see this went ignored. jstrodel, thoughts?

No matter how many words that fatuous windbag spurts in your general direction, I assure you, your point would still be going ignored.

[jstrodel]

Huh. These guys are Christians...

The Children of God, a.k.a. The Family



***WARNING: MAJOR NTS AHEAD***

I see this went ignored. jstrodel, thoughts?

Not sure what you are trying to see. The vast majority of the world adheres to some form of religious belief, and Christianity is the most popular religion. Of course you are going to have cults and nutcases. What is the point?

My point is that, as a group, Christians tend to be nice people that have families and invite each other over for dinners and their kids play together while their dads talk about the Bible or something like that. As a group, atheists tend to be under 25 and tend to be have some sort of very serious issue that they are angry about, which, when you analyze it closely, tends to turn out to be something that is more akin to an rebellious opinion than an authoritative expression of the state of man's nature. When you see who the people are who are very angry about serious moral issues, when you look at what they spend their time doing, a lot of the time it seems like they spend more time having fun than being angry. Just an observation. A lot of times the Christians who are serious spend a lot more time building up charities and soup kitchens then talking about whether it is immoral to smoke marijuana. Of course this is not always true, but it seems like it is a lot of the time.

Christianity only really works if people are committed to a specific orthodoxy belief system. Atheism, understood as either the absence of belief (in which case it offers no direction for living) or culture of competing ideas about how to live (in which case it offers a conflicting and non-authoritative approach to understanding life, making it highly valuable to those who do not want constraints put upon them) cannot possibly work or produce spiritual fruit, because the nature of the contradictions and number of atheist approaches to philosophy leaves the atheist with essentially a blank check to write whatever amount to himself.

The existence of cults does not disprove Christianity, and it is not contradictory to condemn atheism for its negative affects on behavior which arise out of lack of a single system of ethics that emerges out of the atheist worldview and praise Christianity for its positive effects, which exist in the midst of cults and uncommitted Christians.