Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I agree entirely. The idea that morality came from religion is an incredibly stupid one. In fact, none of my friends are religious, and all of them are much nicer people than a lot of Christian kids I know. Everybody has an inborn sense of morality, it's just that some people are conscious of it, others are not, and still others have learned to ignore it entirely. Part of the reason the Christians I know are such as$wipes is because they'd like to think they're better people than everybody else.

There is some wisdom in the Bible, people just take it way too literally. The Golden Rule, and at least a portion of the Ten Commandments are a perfect example. The problem is that people get the idea that the guys who wrote the Bible were the first ones to come up with all that, which is totally untrue.

i agree.

the Bible is taken to literally...i still find the Old Testament very odd for some reason...something doesn't seem right...

for an odd number of years before the written bible existed...the stories were handed down orally from one generation to the next...over time, eventually stories can change by one point of a degree to either the right of left and the whole original story is no longer the same afterwards...now multiply that to our present time...but then, that is my opinion...

but let's not forget when you translate hebrew to greek to latin to english...so much of it can be lost in translation...especially the creation story

7 days...really!!!

oh, btw...i'm not an atheist
so apologies are offered...

but lets not forget the other religions out there...i remember on the Russian channel, someone was making rude comments about the Bhagata-Gita (Hindusism)...i have only read part of the Bhagata Gita but he was saying that its not right that Krisna has said that we die and ressurect as another animal (or human)...and he said other things that since Krishna had 108 wives that is morally wrong...

Having multiple wives isn't morally wrong the way a lot of other things are... Hinduism is overall a pretty good religion, no reason to break a leg over polygamy

then who set the rules for how many wives a man should have. Who are to decide what is the right amount

i for one would not hazard a guess as to who decides...

having that many wives and children seem more like an economic burden in our present time...but in days of old it may have seemed the right thing to those that practiced it...

more wives guarantee more children: sons to plow the fields, daughters for the dowry...and who can argue the benefits for the husband in the bedroom....

its the nature of the males among the species on this planet, well at least the majority of the species, to multiply to secure the ("bloodline" to make sure its genes live on. The more female companions the bigger the chance that it is your bloodline that rules the plain

It's sort of like the reason insects lay so many eggs, because at least half of them die pretty soon

and no matter our status as a specie and the limits of our human imagination we are still in essence animals: like the male lion in the wild...to propogate our specie

I kind of believe in Karma, kind of law of nature type thing. What goes arround comes arround.

My morality has nothing to do with religion.

right, well I have to go. Need to find a couple of more females before we go to sleep

*walks in* Sinners will burn in hell!!!




\







just kiddin!

Daughters for the dowry? People liked giving money away, you think?

it's the other way around...they pay you to marry your daughter...

Ah, fair enough.

May I ask the hardcore atheists- to your mind, what is the benefit, or maybe the point, of acting in a moral way if you are capable of getting much more for yourself by acting in an immoral way? And if you rate guilt is a reason, I'd probably repeat the question and ask what the point of guilt was.

(that is talking of a specific theoretical situation, not commenting upon life in general).

that question can be asked to the religious as well

Err, well, possibly, though they would probably answer along the lines of ultimate justice re: Heaven/Hell, or Karma, or whatever their belief system implies. The question takes on a different tint when asked to an Atheist. Omega wants to explore atheistic morals; I thought this was a good way fo going about that!

well then the answer would be that you care too much about your fellow human beings to act imoral.................at least until they piss you off

Care brings us back to guilt, doesn't it? What's the point of caring if you could advance yourself more by not?

atheiast will all burn in hell!!!

just kiddin

according to them there aint no hell so you need to find another place

well you will fall a victim of that yourself in the end, but you kind of described stock brokers though

okey.........atheist will all be strickin with cancer

just kiddin again

Well, unfortunately, in real life there a quite a lot of people that doesn't happen to- the stockbrokers who shaft everyone else, make millions and die happy... why not try to be that yourself, rather than being a caring but very miserable guy barely able to make ends meet? If you had that choice.

SnakeHead, go away if you're not going to contribute anything to the discussion.

Ush> hard to say really, I just don't like being an ass to everybody even if it will get me farther in life. Like I said before, humans have an inborn sense of morality and (generally) want to be kind to other people.

*find lynch mob of pilgrims* Lets hangs the sinners!

the only one in danger of a hanging here is you snakehead

eeeekkkkk!! *runs away from homicidal atheist*

well Ush I guess a combination is the best thing, so you dont step on the wrong toes on your way to the top, after you reach the top you can be a blunt ahole

as much as i like to believe that humans are born with an inborn sense of right or wrong...i find that hard to swallow in the fact that where does one find what in relation to what is right or what is wrong...for the religious that was explained away by our so called definition of God...for the Buddhist possibly as an action to a reaction, e.g. (hypothetical guess)to show kindness will in return be reciprocated...

for an atheist the question of morality is based on what? an act of kindness and charity towards your fellow humans? or is it based on do unto them as they would do to you?

maybe an atheist is a closet pragmatist...

The fact that atheists care about other people at all is what leads me to believe that everybody is born with some sense of morality. Not really "right vs wrong", more of just an instinctive sense of caring for other humans. If an old woman falls down on a sidewalk, people stop to help her... Religious or not. Surely this proves my point at least a little?

most people learn a sense of morality from paretns and in school. And then there is common sense a thing that religious people by no means have monopoly on

Well, it's called common sense for a reason... Because most people have it.

Omega>your last comment (to Ush) is really what I'm talking about when I say people have an inborn sense of morality... I really should have used a different word--humans are social creatures, they need to be accepted by other people... Which is why most people don't intentionally go around being mean to everybody else for their own gain.

Well, To answer Ush's question properly, you have to look at what makes religious people act morally good or whatever. Its a fear of God, or going to Hell or reincarnating as a Dung Beetle, or whatever.
But Atheists Don't have that fear, so I guess nothing is stopping them, But The reason they don't do it is because their morals are for a different reason, Its for doing what is right to help people, not so that they wont be punished. I've never meet and Athiest who is an ass, they are usually nice because they believe in people not gods.
Guilt may play a part in it as well.

Funny, in a way atheists really seem like more moral people... They're being nice because they want to for themselves and other people, not to avoid going to Hell or whatever.

still religious people think that it is one of their trades

One of the benefits of acting in a "moral" way (apart from self-respect) is laid out by Richard Dawkins in his book the selfish gene. If you break behavior down into 3 stereotypes - cheat, sucker and grudger - the first two being self evident and the 3rd being an example of treating people fairly and decently until they act differently towards you - and then and only then acting hostile towards them - when you run the groups interactively as a model you see that the grudgers group comes off best every single time. It's good for survival of the species.

An example being the birds that clean a crocodile's teeth. They gain protection from other predators, while the crocodile gains less rotting teeth.

It pays to be "moral" but not to turn the other cheek. It's called Reciprocal altruism - it's worth reading up on.

ooops.

I don't think anyone is born with a sense of morality. While we can be taught morality by others we can still learn it early in life by ourselves. Empathy has a lot to do with it, we (humans) can put ourselves in other people's shoes. When we act, we know roughly how our actions will impact on other people involved. We're all in the same boat of existing in this universe. Immorality seems to stem from a person thinking they're better or more important than most people.

I think a lot of people would very heavily question inborn morality in humans; it's more commonly put down to social factors.

And Tpt, that's unfair to religious people. They don't necessarily act morally out of fear; they do it because they know there is a third-party system of arbitration which says it is the right thing to do, and they know it. An atheist can never know that because there is nothing out there making judgments except for each other.

Omega, but surely if you could remove that sense of honour and be happier for it, that would be the rational thing to do? Some might- very reasonably- say that your sense of honour is merely obstructing your own potential. Those without such a sense are no endemically less happy than you, and perhaps endemically more; after all, the less restrictions you live with and get away with, the happier you are going to be.

Humanism is a very difficult area- and the most difficult thing of all is its self-justification. Morals, ultimately, don't do anything other than obstruct you. Society can certainly do without them, IF it is properly run. So why bother?

The difference between a hardcore atheist and a not hardcore one, Omega? One for you to think about, that...

Yes, life would be much easier if everybody was only looking out for themselves... But let's face it, humans are obviously not the most logical race in the universe.

well...all these thoughts and ideas still seem to confuse me as for the moral attitudes of most atheist or the lack thereof...

most if not all of you believe we are born with a sense of morality, of right and wrong...while others believe it is learned through experience and the wisdom of our elders...

while others say that we are taught and shown this from divine inspiration...while others through enlightenment of the mind through physical and mental discipline...

and if we go even further back, then as a means to further the survival of the species when the sick and the old were taken care of...when man had a concept of the right thing to do and when we developed an emotional attachment...even before the idea of spirits or a divine being was a spark in the collective pysche....

so in essence, the idea of right and wrong was born over 100,000 years ago at the time of the neanderthals? or maybe even further than that?

so let me ask you this...at the risk of your own personal safety
lets say you saw a group of thugs attacking someone and you knew that they are doing wrong - and in the back of your mind you think they may be even armed - and you're alone and know you've no power to stop what's happening...would go over and stop what's happening anyway because it's the right thing to do or keep going on your way and call for help knowing that that person may suffer deep if not fatal physical harm...

oh, and TO - i consider myself a practical human with an inclination towards God in the physical not the literal or biblical sense...

Not an easy question to answer, especially truthfully. I think it's hard to say without actually being there, while my own morals would play a part in the decision, other elements such as fear or rage would also contribute. I assume by a group you mean 3+ people attacking and the victim is a total stranger, so no personal attachment to them would come into play. Also, by breaking it up I assume you mean physically intervening. If I genuinely felt my life would be in danger should I interfere, sitting here, where I am now, self preservation seems to be my logical conclusion. But we're I in that situation for real, who knows? A mixture of my morals, fear, anger and plain ignorance to the danger I may put myself in would trigger a knee-jerk split second decision. I may try to break it up or even attack the group (not that it would be the smartest thing to do, but that's my point). Although this is a question of morals being put to the test, because of these other contributing factors it may not be the best scenario. It's really hard to imagine accurately what I would do in that situation, but I gave it a shot. I hope I've answered your question to a degree.

Personaly I believe that no religion is the foundation of a set of morals or ethics like the ten commandments from Christianity. Those are just the basic rules which a larger community of ppl needs to apply to be able to work properly, with a few divine rules added. IMO morals and ethics are in our blood we, atleast most of us, are born with a natural feeling for what is right and what is wrong, it only needs some fine tuning

I also believe moral is taught to us, influenced by many parts though

The more I read this, the more I kinda am formulating a theroy thingy.

I believe our sence of morals is part of our instict, coming from a sub-consious knowlage that we depend upon each other. This coming from our ansectrial hunter-gather roots. The reason that children seem to lack morals, is that they haven't logicly decided that we depend on one another.
The specifics of morals may waver on certian teachings but the basic principal is ancestrial.

Tpt> Yes, that sounds about right. Most offspring in the animal kingdom has to be taught various things by their parents, be it hunting, socialising or speaking.

We've been urbanised for such a short period of time compared to the time we spend hunting and gathering, that we haven't been able to adjust to giant "kin-groups".

To so you agree with me? cause I'm not following your last post (altho it looks the same as mine)


good theory TpT

Thanks,
As Omega said, We havent Gottend our "City" instinctive Morals done yet. Give it a couple more hundred thousand years

Sadly enough I fear that that Globalisation of Morals will lead to a lot of Liberalism

You seem to be thinking that I am saying you would be happy simply because you are un-restricted. That was never my argument. I was saying that morals deprive you of opportunities to be more happy than you are. Morals look like a curse in that regard- and we are living in fairy tale land if we think people who do 'good' (whatever that is in the world of the atheist) are always going to do well and be happy; we know full well the bastards do a lot better than the saints.

What the heck does the betterment of others matter at all? In a Godless universe, none of it matters at all. The future doesn't matter, and ultimately other people don't matter. Only yourself matters- in any rational sense.

Humans don't HAVE to be social creatures, and when some of the happiest- perhaps THE happiest- are the most immoral types you can get... can someone actually give any consolation to the people that have a code of honour and try to follow morals and yet are utterly miserable?

I actually doubt it.

Just to get yoru bering here Ush,
Are you a religious or spiritual person?

I think you're right there

Not really, though I am open to ideas.

Thats what I thought.

well from my point of view and how I look at things that statement, to me, would be false

This only applys if the person is determined to be a bachalor their entire lives. I believe bettering the lives of your children is a huge reason why the future would matter. Anyone who has had children woudl tell you that they become their entire lives. This could be a reason for philanthropy.

You'd have to give me a good reason why. How could any of it matter? There is nothing for it to matter TO. You only think it matters because... well, because you THINK it matters. You didn't have to think that, and opportunities to be happy may be far more plentiful if you didn't. That might make you a far less nice person- but so what? And who is to say what is nice anyway?

And I could just as easily say that is down to irrationality. Why not be a bachelor if that is the happiest way to be- which it certainly is for a whole lot of people over history, who took women for pleasure when they wanted them and didn't get stuck with commitments to family.

The fact is that the lives of your children are actually spectacularly irrelevant. What does any of it matter once you are dead? Once you are dead, you are dead, you are worm food; nothing anyone says or thinks can affect you, you will be the same whether your kids do great or crap.

If you can tell me something else that counts, in this set-up, more than your own happiness, I would be interested to hear it.

What about the fathers who abandon their kids and lead happy lives never having to care for them ever... just WHY is that wrong? Tell me why they should not do that if it would be the happier option for them. Because it is tough on the kids? So what? Free of the burden of conscience that doesn't matter to them. And there ARE people like that, and they ARE happier for it.

Well, helping other people and being a generally good person is a lot more enjoyable to a lot of people than being mean and cruel, Ush.

the best reason I can give is that IT IS HOW I AM. I get glad when others do good. Dont get me wrong I dont wish that for everybody. But in my job with betting it makes me glad when someone wins big, I feel for them and welcome them for their fortune. It matters because I know it matters not only think it. That whats make you go on, if not you end up like a grumpy old prune ,not everyone is a Scrooge you know

I see what your trying to say, If no one has any spiritual consequence than why does anything matter?

My answer is that it's instinctual. Deep inside us there is an instint for heratage. Everyone wants to be remembered after they die, thats th reason for empires and such. People want to be remembered. Thats why people persue familys. Thats the easiest, most direct way of being assured that your are remembered. The bachalors either have found another way for that to happen, or are the oddball who just don't care, who decide that it doesn't matter if they are remembered. They might be missing that instinct or something, I really don't know.

About the fathers who abandon their kids.
Most people see it as running away from responsibility, not as going to live a happier life. They are the people who are like the ones who never have a family, they don't care about being remembered. They are in the same catagory as the ones who never get married or never have kids. And there wil always be people like that.

eehhh I feel like anti Ush here, Ush shouldnt be the subject cause Ush raises some really good questions for the sake of arguments, we reply but it seems like one way street towards his well thought considered arguments........me one of them. sorry ush you know i love a good discusion but not one sided tough. I hope you see......well you know

Nothing that I can think of is more important that a persons happiness in life. (As long as pursuit of that happiness doesn't impact negativly on the happiness of others).

As for fathers who leave their children for their own happiness, they are simply fools. It is wrong because they created that life. I don't believe that leading a bachelors life, or getting married and never having children is wrong. But when you create a life you must be responsible for you actions, just like any other choice you make in life. These things do happen though, but just because something is wrong doesn't nessecarily mean anything can be done about it.

YOU say they are fools. But if nothing else matters and they are much happier for it... what the heck is foolish about that? What you- or anyone- says they SHOULD do could not be more irrelevant. They are happier- end of story. There is no 'must', because none of it matters, remember?

Also, what does it matter how much your happiness impacts negatively on othes if it does not negatively impact on yours? Morally? So what, it doesn't MATTER!

And it's not even morally, because if none of it matters, then you make your own morals.

Ush> you said Athiesm and morals are irrational. Well humans are irrational as well. we do things that just don't make sence. Why does one Run into a burning building to try and save a child? It doesn't make sence in the simpleist ways. It voids what anyone says about self preservence. Why in war will a soldier jump on a live grenade to save his buddies?
In this we are all fools, we all do things that make no logical sence. none. We try to be logical but in short it is impossible for us to be. We could not exist if we were. It make snece to shoot someone for their money. but if everyoen did that we'd all be shot and our species extinct. Our very being is defined by our illogicality.
If Atheism makes no logical sence, then it is human, more human that some religions.

"You are right, the good feeling that comes from helping others is a selfish one."

Actually, I don't think I AM right. I severely question that line of reasoning, especially applied generically. But never mind that for now.

"But in that case there is nothing wrong with being selfish as it is beneficial to the helper and the one in need of help"

Ah, I disagree there though; I think selfish actions do not become morally acceptable because they do good by COINCIDENCE, which is effectively what the deal is here. If you didn't feel good about it you wouldn't do it, and that makes its moral value rather futile. Objectively, in isolation, it looks positive but as a reinforcement of selfish behaviour it is morally questionable.

"Money can make some people happy but I know for sure it wouldn't come close to completing me. I suppose a fools happiness is just as good as any but someone like me desires more than material positions. Although I'm not foolish enough to say I could be happy without money and material goods, I just don't centre my entire life around them."

Well, again, I'll just say the same thing back to this- it would not make you happy... that's YOUR problem. You cannot even opbjectively call it a fools happinbess- happiness is happiness, indistinguishable. If you DIDN'T desire more, and COULD be happy with simple material possessions, everything would be a whole lot simpler and probably better for you. Again, we come back to the irrationality of it all.

"I basically said no, not really, but it isn't really that important."

Sounds staggeringly arrogant, that- it sure as hell is important to those losing out from it. No coping strategy makes up for simple lack of happiness. Better to not have to cope in the first place.

"Again, Just because something is wrong to do doesn't always mean anything can be done about it. They are fools, just as anyone who doesn't take responsibility for their actions is. I can't even begin to explain how getting a woman pregnant, creating a life and denying/ignoring your responsibility for it is wrong. Anyone who can't see the error in that should go back to living in caves."

Again- fairy land. By YOUR view it is wrong, but these people, who do NOT go back to living in caves, instead go on to lead lives all the happier for what they did, and no maount of you calling them 'wrong' will change that, and no amount of calling them 'fools' will change the fact that they are now leading a happier life with no personal consequence. I cannot see that as foolish if they get away with it. You just want it to be in some way ultimately wrong... but it is not. There is no such thing as ultimately wrong, remember?

"You're right when you say there is no 'must' in life. Man is completely free in his own actions. It is the consequences of these actions that must be considered. As for my happiness? If it makes me happy to punch people in the face then there is nothing to stop me doing that. But I think that second of happiness would be instantly countered when they punched me back. Negative actions breed negative actions. Karma is true in that sense."

Again, very hopeful. History and real life is littered with plentiful examples of people who get away with it just fine. Karma is not even REMOTELY true. If you are going to hit someone who can hit you back, that's just you being dumb. Hit someone who CAN'T hit back... and you do just fine. What about all the uncaught rapists? There are huge amounts of them, they get what they want and never any comeback. It is silly to think that negativity always breeds negativity. If it makes you happy and you know you can get away with it... why not do it?

"I understand your question and appreciate that it isn't another debate over the existence of god. We must acknowledge that religion does not breed morals nor does atheism. Morals are a human idea and unique to each person. People must realise that atheism is not unpunished freedom to be a bastard and religion is not an instant ticket to salvation."

But religion DOES breed morals... that's not the end of the story, but it does, and furthermore it can give clear reasons why. Atheism finds that far harder to do.

-

Tpt- basically I agree that a certain amount of irrationality is important to a person, which answers a question Omega asked me a long time ago. I suspect Omega wants to see all her altruistic actions as ultimately rational... but I also suspect she would be very wrong to do so.

But I cannot necessarily see that making it objectively the smart thing to do... it is tantamount to saying atheism can work because humans are basically stupid...

I hope I read the posts right...but from what I did read, from this it would seem that the point being made by Ush is this:

If...an atheist that believes in no god and does not subscribe to one of a variety of religions...or in a quasi-mystical philosophical disciplines...

then the very idea of morality whether good or bad-that which is decided by those who believe in morality-is a contradiction to being an atheist.

that an atheist should be free to do what he/she feels without guilt or remorse whether to themselves or to those around them...AND that those actions should not be labelled good or bad for that would be an assignation of morality to those actions...am i correct

for an atheist being what he/she is should have no constraints in whatever they wish to do because they cannot suffer the consequences as one individual would that places morality high on that one individual's list...

in essence...an atheist is neither moral or immoral,

i haven't been following this thread, so sorry if this has been asked already. If there is NO God, what is the purpose in life? Even if you have kids, you never know what tomorrow will bring and how do you tell your kids, you die and nothing, thats it, nothing. Why would you want to work so hard in life and gain nothing?

You're missing the point. The meaning of life is to LIVE. Just live, and have fun doing it, or try at least. Knowing that at the end, there is nothing, would make you live life to the fullest NOW, instead of trying to be something someone ELSE(god) wants, to win a prize you don't even know for sure even exists.

You may not know that God exists, I do. Sorry that you don't.

1. I don't need, nor want your pity, 2. No, you don't KNOW god exist. You think he does, you believe with all your heart that he does, but having faith, and having hard evidence are two different things.

hmm Yes i do, I feel his presence, i've seen him heal and miracles i've seen him change lives, that is MY proof for ME.

You've seen God himself, in a visible form, speak and heal people? Well, that would be hard evidence, and until I see/hear/feel the same, I won't change my mind.

Yeah i know you won't, thats why i said, it's proof to ME.

and I have seen too much misery and sadness and evil to prove to me that there aint no god

If there is no god, then from a greater perspective of things individual human life is meaningless. But what is so incomprehensible about that? Some people have a very hard time considering their own mortality, not that I put you in that bracket. As for explaining it to children, I don't see how telling them the truth would be damaging. I would tell them, but I could be wrong. I don't have kids so I can't really comment with any certainty. I assume what you mean by 'working so hard' is a right of passage into heaven. Although if you were an atheist, neither heaven or hell would concern you. If an atheist walks around in misery because they know their life has no meaning in the scope of the universe, then they need to reconsider their perspective. Just because you have no great purpose doesn't mean you can't live a happy life. Meaningless life really is underrated.

Try this; disregard everything anyone has ever told you about life, god and the universe. Accept life to be just what you see around you, nothing more. Be happy that you are free in your actions and are so fortunate to be alive. Never completely accept something because it is written or because other people believe it. Always be willing to completely change your idea of something, as long as it makes sense to you. Keep your mind critical and constantly open to new ideas. Basically, don't neglect this life while hoping for another.

"If there is sin against life, it consists in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this life." -Albert Camus

"Not if you enjoy the things that result from being mean and cruel, and they are a hell of a lot easier. Bullies enjoy school more than the bullied; seen that myself rather a lot. It's only more enjoyable to those people because they think it SHOULD be more enjoyable- bit of a waste of effort. Far simpler just to look out for yourself; give me a good reason not to. At the very least, if you find a person who clearly enjoys being cruel more than being good, can you give a good reason why he should not go with that? And as being selfish is easier than being selfless, that looks more rational to me."

Sure, it's easier, but there are just a lot of people who don't get kicks out of being mean and cruel to people. There's nothing wrong with being selfish, most succesful people are. But, again, it's not for everyone. Some peopel would rather live a normal, honest, simple life without all the possible luxory that could come from being overly selfish.

I know I don't like being mean to people for my own benefit, I'd simply rather sacrafice a few things myself rather then cause other people misery. It's just how I am. Why am I like that? I don't know, guess my parents did a good job raising me.

White eagle: Try this; disregard everything anyone has ever told you about life, god and the universe. Accept life to be just what you see around you, nothing more. Be happy that you are free in your actions and are so fortunate to be alive. Never completely accept something because it is written or because other people believe it. Always be willing to completely change your idea of something, as long as it makes sense to you. Keep your mind critical and constantly open to new ideas. Basically, don't neglect this life while hoping for another.

I can disregard everything everyone has said to me or taught me, BUT that doesn't change the fact of what JESUS has done in my life, what i have seen him do, How he has changed things in my life. I wasn't always a christian & I can tell you this, I wasn't happy either, Jesus was always missing in my life. Yeah i had some good times, but it didn't last very long. Jesus was always the missing piece in my life.
You say that you wouldn't mind telling your kids the truth, BUT what if it's not the truth, are you willing to risk your kids going to HELL? You tell me to explore the fact that maybe i'm wrong, but what if i'm right?

Heh, heh. I've already said that I've considered the possibility that your beliefs are correct. I was a catholic for 16 of my 18 years on this planet. My choice to become an atheist wasn't made without considering other options.

As for what I would tell my children, you're right, using a word like the truth was a bit clumsy. I would tell them that I don't know what happens when you die, but you are gone from the earth forever. In other words I'd tell them what I know, not what I hope is true. I'd try to teach them to be concerned with this life rather than what might be after it.

You obviously can't disregard everything you have been told about life otherwise god and religion would be unknown to you. Admit it, without other people establishing religion before you, you wouldn't be a believer now. Even if you were born somewhere else, a remote area away from the rest of the world, you would never have even heard of jesus. You may have had a 'gap' in your life but jesus is not the only way to fill it. Everything you can say jesus has done for you can be put down to your own personal determination and general luck. I would like you to explore the idea that you may be wrong in your belief's but I don't necessarily mean to 'convert' you to what I believe. Everyone should be able to put their belief's before someone else and answer any questions or criticism they direct at them without resorting to blind faith.

WHITE EAGLE: You obviously can't disregard everything you have been told about life otherwise god and religion would be unknown to you. Admit it, without other people establishing religion before you, you wouldn't be a believer now. Even if you were born somewhere else, a remote area away from the rest of the world, you would never have even heard of jesus. You may have had a 'gap' in your life but jesus is not the only way to fill it. Everything you can say jesus has done for you can be put down to your own personal determination and general luck. I would like you to explore the idea that you may be wrong in your belief's but I don't necessarily mean to 'convert' you to what I believe. Everyone should be able to put their belief's before someone else and answer any questions or criticism they direct at them without resorting to blind faith.
**************************************************
*
No, i don't thk it would be unknown to me. I've had the choice my whole life to go to church or not go. I wasn't made to go. I chose to go, I chose to learn more about him at a very early age.
No, the things that have happened are not general luck lol but i know thats the way you view it.
When i was a kid, i had dated this guy for 3 1/2 years. We had talked of getting married, i was very close to his parents and even they talked of us getting married, I was very much in Love w/him. Another guy didn't even cross my mind, he was the only one I wanted.
Anyways...he hurt (cheated on me ) me real bad one nite & i was very devasted but i still loved him and wanted to be w/him no matter what. We talked things out & everything, and i was a christian at that time. I went to church one nite and was praying, i was still very hurt over everything, I prayed to God, if he's not the right one for me, plzzz take all my feelings i have for him from me, cuz i can't just stop loving him. There was several people praying w/me, one of the ladies (was not from our church) leaned down and said, God has answered your prayers. She didn't know what i was praying for, she just told me what God told her to tell me. After that nite my feeling for him left.....I knew right then, that God had other plans for me or he wouldn't have taken my feelings away JUST LIKE THAT. If anyone has ever been in love before, they know those feeling don't just leave.
There's tons of things that God has done in my life for me not to believe in him. That did not just happen.

I know you've had the choice to go go church your entire life, I don't think somebody forced you to go. What I meant in my last post is that without other people the church wouldn't exist. People who lived before you established all the churches and religions we have today. All religions are man made, there is nothing miraculous about any of them. I sympathise with the pain you've been through but I don't think god took your feelings away just like that, sounds like a placebo to me. Although you probably knew I would say that. With or without the idea of god you would have made it through your problems, I think you underestimate your own power to overcome problems. But keeping with what I said earlier, without the actions of humans before you, there would be no religion. Because there is nothing on earth that even hint's towards a higher power at work. Don't you think?

I've heard that story before, from a pastor who was visiting my school.

Ever think that the woman told you exactly what you needed to hear to make you feel better? Sometimes hearing the words that have just the right meaning makes you change the way you think subconciously. Love is an emotion, and just like any other, with the right push, it can be "turned off". The mystery of the human mind hasn't even come close to becoming unraveled.

Or it was God, who did something for you, and nothing for me, who has much bigger problems then a fiance cheating on me.

Yes, i knew you would say that but i know that you can't stop loving someone just like that and feeling don't just go away. And the lady didn't know what i was praying about, she just said, God answered my prayers, so by saying that could have meant, yes you are to stay w/him or no you'r not, being that my feeling left, that was my answer. I know that everyone can get through a break up, but it takes time, it does NOT happen instantly, like it did for me. I also know that no matter what instances i give you, YOU will always try to come up w/something. I thk most people don't want to knw if there is a God or not, it's easier to just try to come up w/other reasons of why ssomething happened than to believe in God.

I know what you mean, but I'm not like that. I would have absolutely no hesitation accepting a god if he we're to appear and make himself known to me. I don't believe an all powerful god could only be seen on earth through the acts of other people, like the woman who told you your prayers had be answered. I would need something more undeniable, something that can't be put down to superstition. I don't lack faith either, but I also don't put faith into just anything. The fact of the matter is I could live with a god or without one. All it would take for me to accept god completly would be a conversation with him, face to face. Do you think that's asking too much of an omnipotent being?

One could also ask: Why doesn't Gods appear to those who do NOT believe.
Why do they always appear to those who already DO believe?

It's the same with the belief in aliens. They only reveal themselves to people who already believe in ET's from outer space.

True dat.







Teen Girl Squad!

religion was just invented thousands of years ago to control the mass...its a method of control.

Pigs in Space

Just want to sign into this thread and allocute to the fact that I am an atheist too !

I became an atheist after watching the hatred and horror perpetrated on each other by the bigots on either side in Northern Ireland some fifty-odd years ago. I was finally commited to this NON belief-system at the age of twenty-two when I could at long-last lay aside the indoctrination that I received at the hands of my loving but seriously bigotted Protestant Christian grandparents.

The best thing that I ever did in my life was to throw off the burden of religion !

It took you until you were 22 to realize this? I realized this back in 7th grade man. of course, you were 22 before I was even born... Religion causes hatred and wars, and the world would be better off without it.

Yeah....Arach...

I began to realise it at that age too but it was only after I had UNLEARNED all of that crap that was put into my head that I could say I was truly free from it. It was a titanic struggle but I won in the end.

It is for THIS reason that I am so hard down on the indoctrination of children.

Omega...

Morals and ethics are NOT in the reserve of the religions but they would love it if they were !

My respect to you Paps. I can imagine that back then it would have been even harder to discard religion than it is now, because of how much more force fed it was to most people. The real fear of god stuff, not just hinting at it. These days organised religion seems to be falling apart in terms of followers, at least in my part of the world. I became an 'official' atheist when I was doing my second last year of high school (catholic high school, funnily enough ). Although I'd had doubts about religion and god for a few years before then. Unlearning is a hard thing to do, I freaked out on a few occasions where I would sometimes start to do the sign of the cross & prayers in school masses when prompted even after rejecting religion. But these were just reflex reactions, but it's the whole life perspective 'un-programing' that's the hardest. I still don't know if I've unlearnt it all, but I'm sure it will come with time. At least I feel in control of my own life.

And yeah, totally against the indoctrination of children. Let them make their own choices in their own time.

People seem to realize it at different times. I guess its just a matter of when
a person is able to see it for themselves.....

It doesn't matter how old you are as long aas you can think for yourself and have an open mind.....

The trouble here is Cipher...that by the time you are grown your mind will usually have been formed to accept only one religion as being the true religion with everybody else being the infidels.

Often, by the time you are able to make your own mind up it has already been made up FOR YOU !

Brainwashing, essentially.

Some people can look beyond that, though. I did.
Of course, my family wasn't intensely religious......

"If you belive in me, I'll belive in you"
said the unicorn to Alice in wonderland.

If I was the dictator of the world I would ensure that no child was forced to follow any one particular religion until it was old enough to make up it's own mind. If that became a worldwide policy we would then see all of the world's organised religions withering on the vine as the cycle of the brainwashing of children would then be broken and the few indoctrinated adults that remained would eventually die.

"Does ignorance, lack of education and fundamentalist views go hand in hand?"

The quick an easy answer - Yes, they do.

BF> Damn, no diplomacy there, huh?

To become a fundamentalist you have to be either (A - Ignorant, or (B - Simple.

BF> Yeah, you know we only disagree on Matrix Sequels and the death-penalty. I just enjoy your bluntness. It's nice to see, especially from someone from the the country that invented "Political correctness."

Well, I grew up on The Simpsons and South Park, so Political correctness just never fit into my life style.

As far as my bluntness, I'm to lazy to waste time and brain power pussy footing around the topic, I say what I have to say as quickly as possible so I can move onto other things.

The people in the arguing class I'm taking are going to get a nice taste of this in the next semester.

Will do. So far it's been great. Our first discussion was "who do you think will make a better president, Bush or Kerry".

And when it came to me I said - "I think both candidates are shitty, but if I had to choose one I'd choose Kerry because I'm sick of Bush botching up the english language every time he attempts to speak."

The teacher agreed.

hehe
Damn, I'd pay money to see that!

Oh my god, you killed Kenny! You bastards!!


mmmkay?

(Has visions of BF doing a speech class with a South Park impression... )

Good question - but don't ask