aleprechaunforums.com!

[Faith No More]

Ah ok. But that is a different motive than originally said by most people. 

A lot of people seem to see the need to oppose God idea of belief, because of the pressure of society to submit to some representative of God.

It dictates on how people "act".

It's not about any pressure being felt. It's about being told by others that you must submit to their beliefs. How would you feel if I insisted that you behave as if no god existed?

P.S. No god exists.

[Simon Moon]

When legislation starts being introduced that's "inspired" by the shit written on the back of a Lucky Charms box, call me up.

The root again of the issue. This seems why Atheists generally come together? If there was no religion, again, people would not care about the issue of God existing.

And it seems the problem lies that you are not satisfied with any of the systems of submitting to God out there or to the divine, that none of the claimants to the truth satisfy you.

That is why you see there is a need to oppose religion all together. And what easier way to do that but to oppose the central figure which they rely upon, God?

I'm not saying this why you disbelieve in God, but at the end, why you argue against believing in God is to do with the fact people submit to representatives and people claiming authority on his behalf?

Why, WHY, don't you get that we don't believe in the existence of ANY god?!

And if you are an example of your god's representative to convince us, he has not chosen wisely. 

You also seem to forget, that you, or anyone else for the history of humanity, has not been able to provide demonstrable evidence and valid/sound logic to support your claims that a god exists. Why would that be?

And one more thing. Even if you could prove that your god exists, why would you think that we would "submit" to him? If the Quran is any example of his nature, I do not want anything to do with him.

You are getting more and more frustrating as time goes on.

[SteelCurtain]

We "organize" to prevent people with a bronze age version of morality from attempting to legislate that morality for everyone.

Yes, we resist the idea that seems to be part and parcel with religious belief that the way you live your life should be the way I live mine. I don't want YOU dictating my morals. I couldn't give less of a shit about your god.

Ah, but this exactly what I'm saying. People don't care about God, but the fact that there is people saying "this is the path to follow", this "is what you must follow or submit to or be or do".

Again, sing to your heart's content. I don't care if you want to tell me how to live. I'm a big boy with a big brain, I'll talk back.

It's when you try to enact laws that codify your beliefs that I get loud.

[Mystic]

Ah ok. But that is a different motive than originally said by most people. 

A lot of people seem to see the need to oppose God idea of belief, because of the pressure of society to submit to some representative of God.

It dictates on how people "act".

It's not about any pressure being felt.  It's about being told by others that you must submit to their beliefs.  How would you feel if I insisted that you behave as if no god existed?

P.S.  No god exists.

Ok, but this is exactly what I'm saying. You don't like being told "you must believe in this and follow this path or follow this and that or do this and that and don't do this and that". The core of the issue is you hate the notion of dictating on what to do.

But if there is no God, you have everyone doing that anyways, You have people making laws, you have society making morals, which differs society to society, and then you have your own confused self that just picks from here and there but mostly finds it's self agreeing to the people he feels identified with the most (atheists). But if there is a God, then who is more worthy to be listened and obeyed and followed and who more worthy of guiding to the truth then the wise knowing creator?

[Mystic]

And if you are an example of your god's representative to convince us, he has not chosen wisely. 

I agree with that. If I am God's representative, then I am a sorry choice, which definitely proves I am not. But even if people all thought I was high and pure, without proof from God, I would be a wrong choice to assume by people. Who and what qualities do you expect in who represents God and his teachings?

[SteelCurtain]

Your holy book belies that claim. If I can act in a more moral manner than your prophet just by not raping a 9 year old, I'll look elsewhere for my moral guide.

[Cyberman]

Perhaps because a word was needed to distinguish between those that believe and those that don't. Incidentally, atheism doesn't put the emphasis on "God" alone. The focus is on all theistic claims and beliefs. There are thousands of gods worshipped throughout history and many still 'active' today. The big-G god is merely one amongst those many.

But why focus on gods...and it seems a lot of people are saying the problem they are having is that people claiming to be his representatives are trying to dictate to humanity on how to live.

You're making this much harder for yourself than it really needs to be. The response to theistic claims and beliefs is a legitimate area of discussion. Scepticism is the arching term, within which - to coin a phrase - there are many mansions. They specialise individually in such things as ghosts, ESP, UFOs, cryptozoology, spoon-bending and so on. You just happen to be asking these questions on a forum in one of those mansions devoted to atheism, that's all.

If it helps, maybe compare it to the word 'science', within which broad subject are dedicated fields such as mathematics, physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology etc. Though different subjects, with a certain degree of overlap, a physicist, a biologist and an astronomer are still all scientists.

[Mystic]

Ah, but this exactly what I'm saying. People don't care about God, but the fact that there is people saying "this is the path to follow", this "is what you must follow or submit to or be or do".

Again, sing to your heart's content. I don't care if you want to tell me how to live. I'm a big boy with a big brain, I'll talk back.

It's when you try to enact laws that codify your beliefs that I get loud.

And what if a leader one day you see on TV says I am the representative of God, I am the chosen one of God, I am the successor of the last of the Prophets, I am this and that, and majority of the world support him, and want to form and rally around him. And majority of believe in him.

What would you do? Would you fight him? Or would you let him be? Would you just intellectually try to defeat him or would you fight him if most of the world believed in him?

[Simon Moon]

And if you are an example of your god's representative to convince us, he has not chosen wisely. 

I agree with that. If I am God's representative, then I am a sorry choice, which definitely proves I am not. But even if people all thought I was high and pure, without proof from God, I would be a wrong choice to assume by people. Who and what qualities do you expect in who represents God and his teachings?

I would expect a representative that can provide demonstrable, falsifiable evidence and reasoned argument for the existence of their god. 

Better yet, if a god actually did exist, he would know exactly what I need in order to believe he exists, and be able to provide it unambiguously. He wouldn't need a representative.

[Cyberman]

Incidentally, I'm sure I'm not the only one hoping that one day the label 'atheist' becomes redundant.