National Day of Prayer; May 3, 2007

hogwash...I am not religious but I do not see people as insects...thats just insane...and a person who does not believe is still perfectly capable of understanding and respecting their fellow human being and respecting life and other rights...maybe even more since they think that this life is all we have...so we shouldnt waste it or throw it away...it is so precious...who knows what come after...

Atheists are fully able to understand that we should not make this precious life that we have harder for ourselves and others by harming others...morals are gained through mutual respect of our fellow man and an understanding of basic human rights...I do not want my things stolen so I do not steal, I do not want to be killed, so I dont kill...why do you limit morals and mans ability to treat each other with respect on the belief in an invisible being? So many people kill and hurt others in the name of God through history, how could you ever think that the belief in God is anyway a factor in stopping people from hurting others....the factor is how you were taught, respect for your fellow man, understanding the balance of society...wrong and right...

BUT...like that saying I posted...if people cant behave without god..then by all means...give them god...its what it is for

 

All extremely good points and well written but I'm affraid the indoctrination is too well seeded to sink into most of their brains. Religion is a powerful drug that is not easily kicked.

This paragraph reminded me of something I once heard and I have to paraphrase here: If one person hears voices we call it schizophrenia, it lots of people hear voices we call it religion.

I think this country needs a voting bloc of well organized Atheists or people that are just tired of religious fanatics with their imaginary friend telling society what is and isn't right according to the great all-knowing voice in their heads. Atheists are the largest untapped voting bloc in this country and they need to come together to counter the influence of religious fanaticism that has swept this country. They are no different than the Isamists that seek to define society with warped perspectives and invisible authority figures.

 

Now who is pre-disposed to believing something...eh Cloudy?

 

I understand where you are coming from but that will be hard...I know I do not rally around belief whether it be belief or lack of belief (ranting atheist bashing religion and trying to force itself **** me off about as much as a ranting christians)...my religious views...or lack of...is highly personal and do not move me to gather with like minded people. What moves me are very real issues...while I know religion as it effect society is a very real issue...I do not want to fight chirstians or religion, I do not want to force secularism on people..which is probably why the religious stay on top because they ARE willing to fight to force thier beliefs and views on the whole and government.

I honestly dont care if people wear crosses, if they want to start prayer groups at school...it doesnt bother me...I realize that MANY religious people can see the difference between government and religion and arent on a crusade to merge the two...

If you try to force secularism in every way then you will be blamed for trying to force atheism on people as they will see a secular society devoid of direct religious influence as athiest...thus YOU are forcing THEM to be atheist....

I do think that, eventualy, without the need for crusading, people will slowly see that they dont need god...and humanity will slowly become agnostic...and see that religion is subjective and should never be a forced on the whole in one form. It should always be allowed, just not incorporated into government...If I have faith, it is the faith that level heads prevail in the end

 

I agree. Atheists are able to understand or believe that, but they have no basis for it other than convenience. Behavior becomes a matter of pleasure and pain, what you can get away with vs the consequences if you are caught. The moral grounding for respecting others is lacking. This is or should be a concern to the rest of us.

 

I agree and do not deny it. This is a strongly held belief.

 

Drus, I wouldn't force or even advocate sermonising Atheism. I would only advocate that Atheists stand up for the freedom from religion and it's influences on secular society. I don't even like the term Atheism. I think of it as the religion of not believing in God. I'm more of a "give me my secular rights and keep your preaching to yourself and your followers and well outside of my government," type of person.
I wouldn't force secularism on anybody but I would demand that I not have to abide by laws that are religious based and enacted solely for religious reasons.

 

On the other hand, religion is the basis for many human attrocities and God is used conveniently as justification. Violent behavior becomes morally acceptable and instead of consequences you get salvation. The moral grounding that allows believers to kill non-believers is abundant thoughout history and into the present. This behavior should be a concern to those of us that do not believe in omnipotent imaginary friends. hya:

 

Ones behaviour and how we approach it, what we do, what we think we can get away with vs consequences are all the same for everyone...if you are prone to be amoral...you will be...god has nothing at all to do with it...a religious person is just as prone to do anything you speak of...and have no moral grounding. Moral grounding for an atheist is FAR MORE grounded in reality than for the religious, you arent doing it because of fear but because it is simply the right thing to do..I guess you could say it does take a lot more will and moral fiber to do the right thing without the threat of hell...very real ocnsequences for very real actions...I guess some people cant even grasp such a concept of doing the right thing simply because its right...no divine punishment or reward



I guess that is one thing people will someday have to grasp...the ability to develop (or accept that people can develop) strong morals without the invisible big brother (and lets face it, he has done much to stop the scum from being scum). There is simply no need for a god to live a moral good life.

I guess if one is so limited that they NEED these threats of damnation and promises of reward just to be a good person....then I am glad that there is religion for those people...

 

Love this debate...But gotta go have lunch with the kids at school. It's just my atheistic morals that make me do such things with my kids. Bye :bow:

 

I think it's more likely that religion was the "cover" for atrocities and not the "basis" for them. For example, the Spanish Inquisition was prosecuted by Queen Isabella to solidify control over the nation. It wasn't a Church project although they deserve extreme criticism for not trying to stop it. But the outcome would probably have been the same even without religion. All things considered, famous atheist leaders such as Hitler, Stalin and Mao are less desirable as rulers than their religious counterparts. Belief in God is like the brakes on a car. They don'tt guarantee there won't be an accident, but it is preferable to have them.

 

I'd be interested in an explanation of the moral basis for behavior for an atheist. I'd rather not rely on some "moral fiber" that you attribute to them. What is the source of this "moral fiber" in the absence of God?

What stops a person from stealing from another if he is certain that he will never be caught? For a religious person, it is that the other person is a spiritual being created in the image of God, and deserves to be treated the same way you would want to be treated. I find that non-religious people usually focus on hell more than religious people, perhaps because they don't really understand the basis for religion to begin with.

 

Well, I would think, again, you should only speak for yourself...you should remember that most people who are not religious or are atheists more often than not come from families that are since there are FAR more religious families than atheist....

I come from a Catholic family and I went to catholic church until my tweens, I have read the bible and went through all your usual catholic rites of passage. Certainly I was taught we are made in the image of some invisible god...but I was never really told that is why you follow a moral life...it was more stressed that if I dont, I will not be rewarded with eternal life in heaven and will instead suffer eternal damnation...me thinks you are are again attributing all peoples religion with how you were taught it...you should remember there are all kinds of ways to teach it and your is just one in your microcosm...I wouldnt even expect that all catholics were taught in the same way as I was....

But indeed, it is not a lack of knowledge about the Christian faith that makes me stress heaven and hell, I have read both the bible and Koran the bible stresses eternal life and damnation, and the way religion was taught to me also stressed this. That good people are rewarded while bad people are punished...its a historically fundamental teaching and belief of the christian church. I was also taught to 'do unto others...' which can be taught without the need of god.

As for what stops a non-religious person from stealing? well, you said it yourself, just remove 'god' and it still holds true.

What stops a person from stealing from another if he is certain that he will never be caught? For a non-religious person, it is that the other person deserves to be treated the same way you would want to be treated.

as simple as that...just take out the superfluous mention of spirit and god and you have the true reason for anyone not to harm another.you just placed in a few more elements to stress WHY but the true reason is not because they are in he image of god but simply because they are just like you. You know you would not want it done to you, so you dont do it to others...plain and simple. Now if you NEED to insert the 'god' into it because you havent developed an appropriate respect for your fellow man and need that extra incentive not to harm others...then its good I guess.

I gained my moral compass from real world examples of good people. I am probably lucky in that respect to have a father who is deep down in his core a moral person and a mother who is also a very moral person. these 2 people laid a basis for how I would be. Not through religion as they werent terribly religious (though they did send me to church, I didnt not gain my morals through church which was just boring ritual). I gained my morals through example. My father does not cheat on taxes, drives the speed limit (even if he could get away with it he wouldnt), he has never committed any crimes, he is fastidiously honest, sacrificed for his family, when he retired he went to work with the handicapped...he is not doing this because of religion, he is just a good person.

I truly think that even with examples like him around, even with strict religious teachings, a person will become amoral...why? who knows...I just dont, maybe some people are just rotten and some simply are innately good people. I do know that even with such a great example in my life of a highly moral good man...I still had a lot of slips but eventually I came to see him as the deep down good man he is and wanted to follow his example and be a force for good in this world. He get so little recognition for what he does...I know he isnt looking for it either...I know he is just a kind man.

In the end, I have never thought too terribly deeply about it, I am a pretty simple guy, I had a lot of questions about religion and god that nobody could answer for me...so I decided I didnt need it. I figure if it exists...then it exists and my believing it exists wont make it any more true or false. A chair exist whether I believe it does or not... If I am wrong, I will find that out when I die like everyone else...IMO nobody knows for sure if their path is right or wrong when it comes to personal belief...we are all just choosing or going along with what was given to us. I figure that if I cant make myself believe in god, I shouldnt pretend...that is dishonest...but I keep it low in real life because when one says you dont believe in god...that often can mean trouble for you.

But how one develops morals is not a science...you can do almost everything right and still end up with a serial killer...it is no more a science than god is...to ask how one develops morality in a person is like asking you to prove there is a god...you cant....I can only tell you how it works for me, and you can only tell me how you THINK god is, and being a rather simple person I have always been told to treat others as I would like to be treated...when I hurt others I am told 'how would YOU like it if he did that to you' and eventually that just sunk in and now I take such things into consideration...I am not perfect, nobody is...but I have a strong sense of right and wrong...and I dont need the nth element of the invisible god (however you say it is useful in controlling human behavior)...all I need is a healthy respect for my fellow human being and his or her right not to be harmed by me...

But if other DO need that extra something because they are unable to understand the innate need to respect the rights of others...then it is good there is religion for those people. In fact that is why I am not anti-religion. In the end I doubt this would change your mind about those wwho dont believe in god...all I can do is speak for myself and for me its tough to explain why I hold on to my woral so tight...honest is very important to me...which is why I can stand politics and rhetoric...

 

I'm sorry you weren't taught correctly, or perhaps didn't learn the lesson as intended.

I don't think your assertion is adequate that everything holds true for an atheist as it does for a believer. You haven't explained the basis for it. If a person has no soul, no spirit, and is simply a lump of matter moving around no better than an insect, then there is no morality and no reason they deserve any special treatment. There are no "inate" rights for an insect. They haven't been endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, because for them there is no Creator. For a true atheist, there is no right or wrong because there is no moral basis for "right" or "wrong." Right is what feels good regardless of the impact on others. Wrong is what causes pain. It isn't wrong to hurt others if you are an atheist. It's only wrong to get caught. Bug like.

 

I love it...another midas...you are the arbiter of right and wrong ways to follow a god

Well...we can agree to disagree, I dont believe in god, and I have morals and respect for my fellow man, I would never kill or steal...so your theory doesnt seem to be working out very well.

But if you need a god to keep you in line...I am glad you have that for everyones sake and safety...and if you need to attribute your own failings to recognize the innate need to repesct your fellow man with out the need of a god on others...that is fine as well.

 

Drusus, you're a lucky animal to be able to make that choice. The male lion kills the cubs he did not father without understanding why and never feeling remorse or guilt. You have free will to act or refrain from acting, even if you don't understand why you make the choices you do. Life in the zoo has trained you to behave well, even by religious standards, yet you don't know why you act as you do. It's something to ponder as you lie in bed tonight, and try to figure out why.

 

Just a different kind of training...you are an animal conditioned by religion, I am an animal conditioned by other means...what makes us a bit better than an animal is that, like you say, we have a choice, we have risen above base instinct because of our major evoltionary trait, a large complex brain...its not that deep...I dont hurt others because I simply dont want to and I dont want it done to me, I merely understand the grande human social contract...

 

That's basically my point. Atheists make choices, but have no basis for concepts of morality or of right and wrong. We can only hope that they are well-trained in what you call the "social contract."

 

and my point is I HAVE a basis of right and wrong and morality as much as you do...its just not of a divine nature...and doesnt need to be. I justify right and wrong in the same way anyone does...I just dont need to tag god on it, I have been shown right and wrong and a repect for human life just like anyone else, I just dont need people to have souls and be in the image of god to justify good behvaior. The same can be said of ANY person...you hope they are well trained and understand...because there certainly are quite a few who arent...or are and go rotten all the same...take care.

 

Is there really truely a difference between using religion as a cover or using religion as a basis for committing atrocities like genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity? Even if there is a fine distinction bewteen the two and you are into splitting hairs for the sake of the convenience of your arguement, the result is still one heck of a lot of dead people that died because someone somewhere was able to tap into enough followers of some religion to get them to commit horrific acts of violence on a grand scale simply be invoking the name of God.
As far as Hitler goes, he may have been an Atheist but he hardly sought to spread Atheism through his fascist war on Europe. He actually was fairly right-wing even though he is often painted by the Right as a Leftist. Check this out:

Many conservatives accuse Hitler of being a leftist, on the grounds that his party was named "National Socialist." But socialism requires worker ownership and control of the means of production. In Nazi Germany, private capitalist individuals owned the means of production, and they in turn were frequently controlled by the Nazi party and state. True socialism does not advocate such economic dictatorship -- it can only be democratic. Hitler's other political beliefs place him almost always on the far right. He advocated racism over racial tolerance, eugenics over freedom of reproduction, merit over equality, competition over cooperation, power politics and militarism over pacifism, dictatorship over democracy, capitalism over Marxism, realism over idealism, nationalism over internationalism, exclusiveness over inclusiveness, common sense over theory or science, pragmatism over principle, and even held friendly relations with the Church, even though he was an atheist.

As we all know, the Catholic Church had some explaining to do after Hitler fell. Maybe religion isn't awalys the exclusive source of war but they seem to be complicit in many of the larger conflicts.

When you decide whether or not that you are going to believe in a God, you have to weigh the good religion does against the bad that people do in it's name. I believe that people have an innately spiritual side and that this can be used to do great things for humanity. But it can be co-opted by power mad fanatics to inflict enormous destruction on humanity. The fact that people are so willing to do what they are told as long as someone can convince them that it is God's will should be considered along with one's religious devotion.

I just can't buy the fact that you think morals and religion are so closely tied. I think because people are innately spiritual, they have the desire to live their lives as moral individuals. Don't confuse spirituality with God, they are completely seperate. I think religions use our innate spirituality to their advantage but spirituality doesn't need God to exist. In other words, you can be spiritual without religion but religion wouldn't exist if people weren't innately spiritual. I think religion has tried to bind itself to spirituality to the point that most of us think of them as the same thing but it isn't the case.