Tampitump

I don't even think this is what makes Christianity immoral. Christianity is immoral because it based on the notion that an all-powerful, all-knowing deity holds imperfect human beings accountable for the "sins" of the first two individuals in existence. He holds them so accountable, in fact, that there is a place of eternal conscious torture in fire you will go to (by default when you are born) unless you submit fully to the revelation, observe the correct rituals, believe the correct things, etc. It plays on people's sexuality, fears of the unknown/afterlife, and ignorance. Whoever wrote these religions had to know that if people examined their claims critically in terms of evidence, they religion would be dead no time. That's why they have to play upon these fears and human prejudices and ignorance to even have a way to control people's lives. It is the most asinine thing I could ever imagine. But then again, there's the possibility my imagination is limited. Its absolutely amazing that this belief is considered sacred and proper in our cultures. When will we be able to look at someone and call them a dumbass without worry if they believe in this nonsense? I find it really hard, impossible in fact, to look at the world and all of the competing, mutually contradictory religions in the world that claim to be the revealed word of God, and are at each other's throats about which imaginary friend is the real one, and think there is a god behind all of this that is even remotely competent or ethical, much less all-powerful, all-wise, or all-perfect.

This isn't a thread about the label "atheist". Its a thread about the possibility of atheist having spirituality, or the non-religious, non-woo equivalent. Use the term spiritual or don't use it, but say whether or not you think it is or is not off limits to atheists. Elaborate all you want. I'd like to see what people think about this. One other question I'd like to propose is, do you think religious gatherings (i.e. church, mass, synagogues) should be replaced with a secular version? Do you think the church support system gives the religious an advantage over non-believers in terms of belonging and emotional support? I personally think they do. I know there are many people who would like to see religion slowly go away, and I suppose I'm one of them, but I'm not a militant who wants to use big gov't to rip it out of people's arms. I'm more for the power of persuasion. I also like the idea of slowly turning the churches into just mere gathering places that are totally secular, but provide many of the community, support, and emotional benefits that religious institutions currently do for people, not to mention the other good work work some of them do. I see no reason to think you couldn't have a secular version of this that dropped the religious bullshit of worshipping a first century carpenter. What do you guys think?

Same here. But more specifically, I think of the God of Abraham in the same way I think of Zeus or Poseidon. There are likely some people in the world who think these gods mean something profound to their lives, and may well wonder how a person can possibly live or have objective morality or satisfaction without them. Since there are numerous religions that make this claim, and none that are willing to take on the burden of presenting good evidence for these assertions, I'm left with having to dismiss them and trying to understand happiness and other aspects of human experience in naturalistic terms. I find that the natural world offers much more compelling evidence and explanations for these things, rather than asserting an invisible being is behind all of it. There is good reason to believe that human's intellect and ability to have a more sophisticated experience evolved just like everything else. But there are no doubt things that happen to us that cause overwhelming emotions like happiness, anger, excitement, etc. Spirituality to me means trying to understand how the brain achieves these things and trying to use this information to achieve a better overall mental/emotional well-being. And to learn more about oneself in the process. What do you think? Is that scientific sounding for the most part? Or does it still sound like woo?

It just depends on how you use atheism. To me, it means lack of belief, so I'm wholly atheist by that model. I think what Dawkins meant to convey by this is that he is not certain that there is no god. Neither am I, which is why I'm atheist, not antitheist. Getting to the point of the thread though, I do see some merit to the idea that, since our brains are responsible for all the experiences people attribute to souls, atheists are just as likely to have spiritual experiences as anyone else, or to lead a life wherein one looks for these types of insights.

Use the word spiritual however you like.

What I'm getting at is can atheists be spiritual people. Can they have experiences regularly that usually get attributed to religious/metaphysical spirituality without believing in the supernatural?

That's kind of the point. What, if anything, does sporituality mean to the atheist? Your response is requested.

Hey guys, I'm a relatively new member. I've come to find most of the normal members here to be a bunch of very laid back, easy going guys. I probably come across as kind of strange to some of you here. All I can say is that I'm sorry for that. To the point, I see many threads here about religion, but none tackling the question of spirituality as it relates to atheism. Since I understand atheism to be mostly the rejection of claims that assert the existence of god(s), rather than the positive view that there is no supernatural realm or god(s). By this definition, I would consider myself an atheist. There are some popular atheists who claim to be highly spiritual (or at least interested in spiritual experience). Sam Harris comes to mind. I just wanted to start up a conversation to see what the members here think. If you wouldn't mind, if you answer, please state where you stand as far as whether or not you are an atheist/theist/religious/non-religious/deist/etc. I'm waiting to hear your views!

I'm officially withdrawing from this conversation. I think it just boils down to the fact that I have my opinions, as misinformed and baseless in reality as they may be, and I realize that I really just don't have the evidence or education on the subject to really back up what I'm saying. When people put on scary looking masks, and stand in rows with their machine guns against a desolate dessert backdrop committing their lives to jihad, it just seems like pure concentrated religion to me. But I cannot get inside the heads of these people, so I don't know their motivations. I don't see behavior of this scope and scale in other parts of the world or other cultures, but I see where there is some pretty profound prescriptions in the Islamic religion for actions of this sort. I've also always heard about the horrors one might face for going against the religion in these countries. But again, that might be complete lies for all I know. I look at acts like 9/11 and think that its no mystery why is was people of an Islamic culture who did this and not some other culture. I think the evidence is plain for all to see without even having to reference statistics. But again, that's probably another fault of my argument. So, I'm just going to let the big boys handle this conversation.

...

My views on Islam are pretty much pro Sam Harris, and anti-Noam Chomsky, so for further info, refer to those two for reference. Allah knows they are much better presenters of it than I.

I have to throw the disclaimers out there, otherwise people think I'm crazy and an asshole.

Prometheus, I know my responses to your arguments seem strident and rude, but please keep in mind that these are just my opinions. Also keep in mind that my debating prowess is limited to a significant degree by my low level of intelligence. I'm not a very smart or bright individual, so many of my statemens can seem indicative of that. I'm more of a reactor than a thinker, so the possibility of me adding much of substance to a conversation on religion or science is very low to none. That should be kept in mind.

The 9/11 hijackers were about as educated and economically prosperous as it gets. They were middle class or better. So we can throw that one off the table. Many of these middle eastern countries are very wealthy from oil. Give them money and better geo-political circumstances and they would still follow the barbarism of their religion. Wrong, you have to be blind to take YOUR position and be so stubbornly obscurantist. It couldn't be more painfully, blatantly, exquisitely obvious that these acts of martyrdom, suicide bombings, plane hijackings, genital mutilations, throwing gays from roofs, dressing women in bags and beating/displacing them for wanting education is 100% PURE RELIGION. You CANNOT, repeat CANNOT, link this to geopolitics or socio-economics. There is no doctrine in either of these things that encourage this behavior. But there are specific instructions in Islam that explicitly sanction every one of these things. Third world countries without this religion do not engage in these types of practices in this way. Sure, some of them may commit crimes out of anger or frustration. They may steal or pillage, or even murder in some cases, but nothing like the barbarism of the Islamic world. They don't commit these specific atrocities in such staggering amounts. You can draw depictions of Jesus, the Buddha, or any other god without fearing for your life in these countries, But you can't do that with Mohammad. You cannot be atheist, or gay, or anything in these countries without fearing for your life either. It is perfectly acceptable in many of these countries for a brother to kill his sister in honor if he thinks she's a whore or is violating her role as a woman. This is PURE religion.

I completely disagree with you. I think the religion is to blame. When Muslims convert to atheism, they no longer have these feelings or thoughts. That's because the influence for them is gone. You pretty much refuted your own argument here by saying the terrorists are not pious, then saying they want to bring on holy war. That's a religious purpose. And you're wrong, Jihadists totally do what they do for religious reasons. They love death more than the infidel loves life remember? So when a Republican senator tries to ban gay marriage or thwart the teaching of evolution in schools, that's not religious?

there has been Pew polling of muslim countries that show immense support for sharia law. 70-80% in many south Asian and Northeast African countries. The ones further East tend to show less support. They also show support for varying degrees of sharia law. But for the most part, the doctrines that support the denigration of women, the subjugation of homosexuals and apostates, the chopping off of the hands of thieves etc., and all sorts of other barbarism is plentiful in most adaptations of sharia. A large number of muslims living in western countries support sharia law, but many think it should only be enforced in their owm community and not law of the land. The only thing that is missing for terrorism to exist is for someone who is devoutly convinced of the barbaric teachings of the Hadith and the doctrines of martyrdom. I understand that you are forcing me to recognize what you perceive as an empirical double standard on my part, but I don't think the barbarism of the Islamic world should even be brought into question anymore. Even if it was shown that religion has far less influence than I think it does (which it doesn't), I would still advocate for its demise because it is a manifestly unhelpful and untenable belief at the very least. The instructions to kill amd to believe you've done the just work of God is there to be found throughout Islamic doctrine. It is disheartening for someone to keep up with this type of obscurantism when they know full well what I'm saying is true. If you ask these people why they donthe things they do, the answer will always be that its in their faith. Ask muslim women why they wear the veil, its their faith. Why do little girls like Malala Yousafzai get shot in the head for wanting to get educated? Why do cartoonists have to fear for their lives if they draw a picture of Mohammed? Why do people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali have to travel with body guards because they fear they will he killed for speaking out against the faith? Why does Salman Rushdie have to fear for his life because a fatwa was issued for his death for writing a book? My point is that there is very good empirical data outside of poll results that demonstrate the Link between Islam and very backwards societal practices. The poll results that have been done are not exactly good news either. Most muslims are quite okay with most of the barbarism. You may or may not have a confirmation bias. But it certainly seems like you do. I find that most people who want to obfuscate religion and intent like many here are doing have never considered the true horrors of what these ideologies can do. If they did, I don't think they would be going through such mental gymnastics to excuse it and suggest other motives for these atrocities. Noam Chomsky, to my mind, is not a very goid person to listen to on matters related to Islam. Not saying you are though. Besides, as I pointed out before, I'm not a very bright person, and am certainly not someone who should be considered to be well-read or well-educated. I have my opinions, and some of them are ones I'm more convinced of than others. I take no pause in blaming Islam for much of barbarism in the muslim world.

No, but you are arguing for the origins of these beliefs. I'm arguing about the history since these beliefs have existed, specifically how they are observed today. Given all we know today, we are no longer ignorant people with no understanding of the universe. So for someone to choose religion over science in today's world is absurd, yet people still do it in staggering numbers. Where it may have once been true that the culture preceded the religion, or better that the religion was pieced together by the societal values of the time it was written, it is not true today because christians today did not write their religion and neither did any of the others. So it should be reasonable to say that in today's world, religion influences culture and not the other way around.

That's a very good point. You did a good job articulating information. I just don't have that ability. I usually come off as rude or abrasive. I don't consider Islam or Christianity to be highly different from each other. For every barbaric teaching that is in the Quran, it can also be found in the Christian Bible somewhere, sometimes even worse. Its just the level that someone wants to follow the religious text. This, I suppose, does grant some credence to the claim that culture has something to do with it. I don't deny that, but without the religions, where do some of the traditions come from? Why are the traditions different among cultures? It seems to me you can almost always trace the traditions back to the doctrines, or at least back to something that was derived from the doctrines.

The only confirmation bias you seem to hold is a reluctance to link doctrine to action. I don't have the statistics, but I'm at least aware of numerous reports of certain actions of violence and oppression happening in the muslim world. I'm also aware of several of these atrocities occurring on my own country's soil that I don't feel other religions would have had a rationale to commit.These people regularly cite Islam as their influence, and these actions are supported by the doctrines. Actions such as beheading people, throwing gays from roofs, subjugating women, genital mutilation, etc. etc. etc. One need only make a surface evaluation of Islamic culture to see just how oppressive and illiberal it most often is. It does not require statistics or a genius to see that women having to cover their entire body so that the male is not provoked to rape them, and that homosexuality is a sin worthy of death by Islamic text, is not a society that is conducive to human flourishing. I'm not making the claim that all muslims believe this, but I do at least recognize that there is most likely a manifestly strong connection between the religion and the actions some of these people commit. At the very least, the religious beliefs are a hindrance to people actually learning the ways of secularism and cannot possibly be a positive tool to turning a deranged individual into a less deranged individual. At least not without disregarding a large portion of the text. Now, I tend to hold all religions in similar contempt, but I think that in this current era, there is definitely a much more alarming problem coming from the Islamic world in the form of ISIS and global jihad etc. than there is from, say, Christianity or Judaism. Sure, both of these religions have had their moments of pure heinousness, but secular progress and modernity have continued to tranquilize these religions into shadows of their former selves. The muslim world has not had a Newtonian Enlightenment or a Renaissance, they are still living with the baggage of their medieval religious practices. There are some very good muslim spokespersons out there like Ayaan, Maajid, and Salman, who have advocated for a major reform. That's because they understand that a literal or fundamentalist view of the doctrines almost necessarily lead to violence and destruction. They are muslims who have actually experienced first-hand the horrors of living under Islamic theocracy, and are doing the right thing by encouraging these people to reform the faith. While I think that an alarming percentage of Christians in this country are delusional and hold some very wrongheaded beliefs,they are in no way the type of threat that global jihad poses. The Christian philosophy in the US (for the most part) has essentially been relegated to "Jesus was all about loving your neighbor, so that's what we believe". Most Christians at least have a decent rationale for dismissing the Old Testament in all its bloodiness. They think Jesus committed the ultimate sacrifice which rendered Moses' laws obsolete. They're wrong on many accounts, as Jesus explicitly said you can't get rid of the old laws, but nonetheless Christians tend to use Jesus as the ultimate Euphemism to excuse and dismiss 99% of the Bible. The same cannot really be said about Islam. The further you read into it, the stronger the rationale for killing in the name of the faith gets. I also feel I would be remiss if I didn't point out the fact that I'm not a scholar on these issues, nor am I a scientist or theologian of any stripe. I'm just a lonely little man sitting in his room typing this stuff. I've probably spent more time studying this stuff than the average person on the street, but my arguments should be seen as nonacademic, and prone to being misinformed. I'm not stating these things as truisms, but merely how I perceive things to be. Give me a rationale outside of religion for systematically beheading people, throwing homosexuals from rooftops, committing suicide bombings, and mutilating the genitals of little girls. It really is troubling for you be this obscurantist. When you have a religious text that spells out ad nauseam instructions for killing people, and other hadiths to encourage even more wicked behavior, it is obscene for someone to be like "please cite your sources for believing these religious texts influence this behavior", when it is so painfully obvious. These people are so afraid of offending their religion, and are so sexually and morally repressed that they follow it to the letter. It couldn't be more obvious that these people truly believe in their religion, and their actions are based on the religion. You don't get Christians hijacking planes and flying them into buildings. You don't get Christians beheading gays or throwing them off 30-story buildings while forcing children to watch. You don't get Christians covering their women in cloth, fearing that the men might be provoked to rape them if they take them off, then claiming she is responsible for the rape as she provoked the man to rape her. It is an asinine set of beliefs that I have absolutely ZERO respect for and am ready to see the death of. Christians don't do these things because its not heavily enforced in their belief set (at least as it is imagined by modern Christians). Christians do engage in other forms of religious nonsense, but it is much less problematic than Islamic fundamentalism.

Not all of them. But I at least consider the "oxymoron" statement to be very wrong. I can be civil. I'm not a very smart person, so you can attribute many of my outbursts to lower intelligence. But you are witnessing me at my worst right now.

I couldn't agree more. You probably thought I would deny that. In fact, I mentioned that in one of my first posts on this thread by relating religious belief with the southern, christian culture I live in. The amount of hateful beliefs many of these people harbor about people of other sexual orientations, other religions, and even other races are indefensible, and I know many of these people personally. I know they are not deliberately mean, hateful, or irrational people. They are religious people. Their religion influences their thinking on these matters. If you ask them, its not their fault that homosexuality is forbidden, its just what God says in the Bible. And when someone like myself wants to point out that these ancient, outdated concepts are perhaps influencing people's thinking in bad ways, the conversation immediately gets boycotted because we have to preserve people's feelings by not bringing their religious beliefs into question. This is a big problem. This is the exact same type of belief protection that allows Islamic fundamentalism to commit such atrocities, and have people completely deny that Islam had anything to do with it. It renders the victims of these ideologies helpless because the beliefs cannot be brought into question. It is totally absurd if you think about it, because this line of thought advocates attacking the individuals committing the crimes, instead of attacking the ideas that influenced them. My position is more reasonable, and less demeaning by virtue of this fact. I'm attacking the doctrines and ideas, not the people themselves. I even explained that the 9/11 hijackers were not particularly deranged or evil people. They were simply acting on their true convictions. I just don't see any way you can have suicidal and destructive tendencies of this sort in such staggering amounts, and think that there is not an underlying belief behind it. Of course there are millions and millions of wonderful religious people in the world, and I'm sure Jimmy is one of them. I understand that not everyone takes the barbaric parts of the religion to heart, and only see them for the good things these doctrines deliver to their lives. But we have to stop denying the link between religion and many of these atrocities and hateful actions.

Then what argument are you making? I know I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I can't see how you're not being trying to excuse religion of its fair share of influence in these matters. The only thing I'm trying to point out is that people have to deny many things in order to make themselves believe that religion is innocent in these matters. Trust me, I don't want to put words in your mouth. I'd rather steel-man your argument than straw-man it. So please correct me where I'm wrong. What is your argument?

Jimmy, I want you to read this aloud to yourself. You are a stupid person. Get that? A STUPID PERSON. You should be ashamed for the nonsense you just spewed in your last post. I know this post will likely get me banned, but I'm personally offended by your idiotic Islamic apologetics. You're basically saying that the victims of Islamic intolerance and atrocity have no reason or right to tie the oppression they face back to Islam. That if they do so, they would be committing an "oxy moron". How dare you do that? How dare you? You said in one breath that I offended you by suggesting you are covering for madmen and violence, then you and start doing just that... Quran apologetics, splitting hairs trying to find verses that suggest the Quran and Islam is peaceful, and that it is indecent of me to suggest that it is violent. You find one measly verse, them claim that it is absurd to think the Islamic doctrine as a whole is violent and intolerant. NONSENSE! You are 100% wrong about the Quran not promoting violence and murder. It is replete with instructions to kill the infidel. You say that it forbids killing "innocent people". You should do more research into what is considered "innocent" in Islam. Killing apostates is not considered killing "innocence". Why do so many Muslims, when polled, agree with suicide bombing, and agree that cartoonists should be put to death for depicting the prophet? Why is there such a strong culture of honor killing? Why is it a capital crime to be gay in 10 muslim countries? Why do little girls get hunted down and slaughtered for wanting to get educated in muslim countries? Why is it that, in muslim countries, women are beaten or have battery acid thrown in their face wanting to learn how to read, or for not wanting to wear the cloth bags? I know why, because Islam teaches this stuff ad nauseam. I don't care if this offends you. If you really want to make the asinine argument you are making, then go find the victims of these pious atrocities and tell them that Islam is peaceful and that their concerns are unfounded. You should be ashamed for what you're saying, very ashamed. You are too oblivious of reality to talk to on these subjects, and I'm not going to sit here and allow you to keep moving the goalposts and spewing nonsense anymore.

Granted, I don't care what he believes. I'm just trying to make people admit that there is, not just a link, but a direct link between the doctrines and the actions we see happen in society. The religious mind does not arrive at their conclusions through a skeptical investigation of the evidence of reality. Most religious beliefs are, as Sam Harris says, "drummed into us on mother's knee". When I see the bigotry and ignorance of the southern society I live in, I can attribute almost all of it to religious influence. Jesus said it was right, so therefore its right. I would not mind religion so much if people would just drop the violent, racist, bigoted, and ignorant parts of it. The parts that get people to believe stupid things and to commit atrocious acts. I don't mind people wanting to have a spiritual center or wanting to feel that they are more than just "star dust" (even thought they aren't), but there is no need for the tribalism and ignorant mindsets anymore. We are a 21st century human race trying to build a cooperative global society that works and promotes the continued flourishing of our species. Religion is becoming increasingly antithetical to that pursuit.