Can't we just get along?

[Equilibrium]

Dear atheists, agnostics, theists, and antitheists,

 

There's so much squabbling on this board about religion, about God. But let me ask you something...what difference does it make? The theists will continue being theists, the atheists will keep on being atheists. Flaming each other never changes anything, especially on such a place as the internet.

 

Why can we not simply get along? No matter if we believe in a creator or not, sometimes we forgot the core truth that in the end, we are all Human. One of the best things about being human is our diversity, is it not? Being but Human, we will never have the same ideas or beliefs, but one thing we can have is tolerance.

 

We can all agree that we are going through hard times. Now is not the time to argue pointlessly about something which might or might not be beyond our understanding. This is a time for us to stand together and take hands, theist or atheist, whether we believe in tolerance or not. It is a time to come together not because we are Christians, or Buddhists, or Muslim, or atheist, but because we are all Human.

 

Stop dividing ourselves into categories. Aren't all wars caused by the lack of understanding between two groups? We wage "war" between Americans and Afghans. We wage war between Europeans and Muslims in medieval times. We wage war tribe against tribe in the prehistoric period. But in the end, we are simply waging war between ourselves.

 

Everyday I see people on this board bickering about religion without ever changing each others' viewpoints. I've seen people try to make you all realize that there is no point with these arguments, that it is not important when we all see ourselves as, fundamentally, humans. We are not Atheists or agnostics, we are not theists or antitheists. We are People.

[Moontanman]

We can't get along because theism by it's very nature needs to recruit new members to exist. Most religious teachings require that others be made to join, many times if not always this conversion is by sword point, or gun, if necessary, atheists to not fly airplanes into buildings because others do not agree with their religion. Atheism does not require imposing your belief on others, religion lives by coercing others into belief, believe my way or die and burn in hell forever, atheists don't have or want that going for them. You don't see atheists standing on street corners proselytizing their cause. Atheists don't go house to house giving out blank pamphlets. Theists have to convert others or their particular meme dies, atheism is not a parasite on society that needs to reproduce...

[iNow]

But let me ask you something...what difference does it make? The theists will continue being theists, the atheists will keep on being atheists.

This is untrue, and there is plenty of evidence of people converting as a direct result of discussions like those we have here and elsewhere.

 

Flaming each other never changes anything, especially on such a place as the internet.

I tend to agree, but I disagree completely with your assessment that it's all a bunch of "flaming." Many of our conversations are quite reasonable and solid dialogues, even if people struggle with their worldview being so openly criticized. With that said, I think you do a great injustice by casting it all aside and dismissing it as "flaming."

 

Being but Human, we will never have the same ideas or beliefs, but one thing we can have is tolerance.

I am intolerant of ignorance, as well as things which are detrimental to our society like rape, murder, and oppression.

 

Aren't all wars caused by the lack of understanding between two groups?

No. Often, resources are involved. We'll likely see more as the climate continues to shift and we stop fighting for oil and start fighting for fresh drinking water.

 

Everyday I see people on this board bickering about religion without ever changing each others' viewpoints.

And I see people being authentic with their positions, elucidating why they hold them, and changing the viewpoints of many people. I guess that you and I see different things.

 

 

Also, while I appreciate the underlying intent of your post and trying to keep people civil and peaceful, sometimes the core reason we participate in this site is to engage in interesting debates, and to battle over ideas. Why would you want to take that away? It's a major part of what keeps people hanging out here and at other sites like the one in my signature.

[StringJunky]

We can't get along because theism by it's very nature needs to recruit new members to exist. Most religious teachings require that others be made to join, many times if not always this conversion is by sword point, or gun, if necessary, atheists to not fly airplanes into buildings because others do not agree with their religion. Atheism does not require imposing your belief on others, religion lives by coercing others into belief, believe my way or die and burn in hell forever, atheists don't have or want that going for them. You don't see atheists standing on street corners proselytizing their cause. Atheists don't go house to house giving out blank pamphlets. Theists have to convert others or their particular meme dies, atheism is not a parasite on society that needs to reproduce...

 

I beg to differ...Richard Dawkins is an Evangelical Atheist.

 

Evangelism refers to the practice of relaying information about a particular set of beliefs to others who do not hold those beliefs.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelism

[iNow]

Since atheism is not an ideology or worldview, merely the rejection of someone else's, how is it possible to accurately call Dawkins evangelical? He's not sharing beliefs, he's standing in opposition to them.

[Arete]

Almost all of the contradictions stem from three sources:

 

1) Religiously motivated assertion of events that are scientifically unsupported - e.g. Noah's ark, miracles, resurrection, immaculate conception as proven.

 

2)Religiously motivated rejection of observationally supported scientific theorems - e.g. big bang theory, theory of evolution by natural selection.

 

3) Questioning of methodologies that creat contradictions with religious texts e.g. radioisotope dating.

 

I personally would be happy if it remained at the individual differences in belief I could ignore - however:

 

1) Science presented as pseudoscience should be rejected by the scientific community. We, as scientists should not comprimise what we accept and reject simply to appease religious discrepancy with observed reality.

 

2) We should oppose and challenge religiously motivated curtailing of science research and teaching based on the fact it deviates from reality and is fundamentally at odds with religious and secular freedom.

[StringJunky]

Since atheism is not an ideology or worldview, merely the rejection of someone else's, how is it possible to accurately call Dawkins evangelical? He's not sharing beliefs, he's standing in opposition to them.

 

He actively attempts to spread the concept of Atheism, therefore, he is evangelistic.

[Moontanman]

He actively attempts to spread the concept of Atheism, therefore, he is evangelistic.

 

 

I have never had an atheist come to my door to tell me the good news, I see no churches of atheism, in my town I have seen one bill board supporting the concept of no god (and people very nearly shit enough bricks to build a new church), if you eliminated the bill boards that assert theism it would negatively impact the economy of the entire area. The idea that one relatively well known man asserts his disbelief in no way equals the literally millions of theists aggressively proselytize their beliefs, hundreds of TV shows, hundreds if not thousands of radio shows, millions of street preachers, the constant yammering that never stops about how great god is, how god will solve all your problems if you just believe and give your money to them and it's all completely horse feathers and you want to compare a few people who try to point that out? Seriously?

Edited January 18, 2012 by Moontanman

[StringJunky]

I have never had an atheist come to my door to tell me the good news, I see no churches of atheism, in my town I have seen one bill board supporting the concept of no god (and people very nearly shit enough bricks to build a new church), if you eliminated the bill boards that assert theism it would negatively impact the economy of the entire area. The idea that one relatively well known man asserts his disbelief in no way equals the literally millions of theists aggressively proselytize their beliefs, hundreds of TV shows, hundreds if not thousands of radio shows, millions of street preachers, the constant yammering that never stops about how great god is, how god will solve all your problems if you just believe and give your money to them and it's all completely horse feathers and you want to compare a few people who try to point that out? Seriously?

 

Yes, i think he's as polarised as fundamentally religious people...the fact there aren't as many as him makes no difference.

[Moontanman]

Yes, i think he's as polarised as fundamentally religious people...the fact there aren't as many as him makes no difference.

 

 

If there were only a hand full of theists they would only be a quaint bunch of misinformed people but the reality is that they are billions strong and we are few and they don't mind pointing it out regularly. I don't go to theist forums and assert science why do they come to a science forum and assert religion?

[immortal]

If there were only a hand full of theists they would only be a quaint bunch of misinformed people but the reality is that they are billions strong and we are few and they don't mind pointing it out regularly. I don't go to theist forums and assert science why do they come to a science forum and assert religion?

 

Does that mean science is closed on speculating new possible ideas and theories? How can you allow to open a religious and philosophy subforum in a mainstream science forum and expect people not to assert their religious views its just doesn't seem to add up. The Philosophy and religion forums rules are laid out and it works quite fine to have a reasonable debate in these forums and there have been many good threads on those forums.

 

Some do come here with good intentions because the common man is not interested in those philosophical questions and they expect the scientific community to give them directions on what science can answer and what it can't and isn't it the responsibility of those few intellectual people who belong to the scientific community to educate the society however I do know that some people are quite annoying and hold on to their beliefs even when evidence is shown against those beliefs. Don't you realize that there are few theists here who work with in their boundaries and who are open to debate and to put their belief systems for others to critcize and test their assertions.

 

There is very much a possibility that the reality modeled by science is not the only reality that exists in this universe. Does science absolutely assert that there is no scope for any other philosophical doctrines capable of perfection other than the doctrines what it has laid out? I don't think science says that, atheists do and I find nothing wrong in people coming here with their religious views because we are the only bunch of people who are interested in the quest for truth.

 

 

 

 

 

[StringJunky]

If there were only a hand full of theists they would only be a quaint bunch of misinformed people but the reality is that they are billions strong and we are few and they don't mind pointing it out regularly. I don't go to theist forums and assert science why do they come to a science forum and assert religion?

 

Religion doesn't seem to be such an issue overall in the UK so I don't have strong feelings about it like you atheist Americans seem to have. I suppose if it was in my face, like it seems to be for you, I probably would be more caustic and unforgiving in my attitude towards it.

[Santalum]

Dear atheists, agnostics, theists, and antitheists,

 

There's so much squabbling on this board about religion, about God. But let me ask you something...what difference does it make? The theists will continue being theists, the atheists will keep on being atheists. Flaming each other never changes anything, especially on such a place as the internet.

 

Why can we not simply get along? No matter if we believe in a creator or not, sometimes we forgot the core truth that in the end, we are all Human. One of the best things about being human is our diversity, is it not? Being but Human, we will never have the same ideas or beliefs, but one thing we can have is tolerance.

 

We can all agree that we are going through hard times. Now is not the time to argue pointlessly about something which might or might not be beyond our understanding. This is a time for us to stand together and take hands, theist or atheist, whether we believe in tolerance or not. It is a time to come together not because we are Christians, or Buddhists, or Muslim, or atheist, but because we are all Human.

 

Stop dividing ourselves into categories. Aren't all wars caused by the lack of understanding between two groups? We wage "war" between Americans and Afghans. We wage war between Europeans and Muslims in medieval times. We wage war tribe against tribe in the prehistoric period. But in the end, we are simply waging war between ourselves.

 

Everyday I see people on this board bickering about religion without ever changing each others' viewpoints. I've seen people try to make you all realize that there is no point with these arguments, that it is not important when we all see ourselves as, fundamentally, humans. We are not Atheists or agnostics, we are not theists or antitheists. We are People.

 

 

A thread titled 'religion' in a science forum site is an invitation to discuss all this, including some sniping. If don't want to put up with it then either ignore the thread or petition to have it removed.

[John Cuthber]

The "two groups " could get along just fine as long as each stuck to its area of expertise.

 

There are some things where neither side has any special understanding or authority- things like morality.

 

Science has its role- such things as working out the origins of life and the Universe, explaining "visions" working out who to kill (the answer's nobody, cos it's bad for biodiversity) and who to lock up; establishing sensible bounds to reproduction and population growth and so on.

 

On the other hand, religion has it's role too.

However, as far as I can see that's mainly wearing funny clothes, singing a lot and such.

 

I may be mistaken of course.

Perhaps someone would like to tell me what positive benefits religion brings.

[Tres Juicy]

I will openly disagree with anyone who is wrong, whether they are religious or just an idiot

 

I always have an always will.

 

Religion is a means to control the easily lead and I do not like it, it robs people of their common sense and in essence is just a fairy tale belief in magic

Edited January 18, 2012 by Tres Juicy

[Tres Juicy]

It's sad really, but if come to think of "religious" to mean "misinformed"

[seriously disabled]

Religion is a means to control the easily lead and I do not like it, it robs people of their common sense and in essence is just a fairy tale belief in magic

 

^^I agree with you. If there was a real God then there would not be so many people in horrible pain and in a state of perpetual suffering.

 

The fact that there is horrible suffering in the world and God does absolutely nothing to help those poor people and make the world a better place for them, this to me proves that God simply does not exist. And even if somehow he does exist, then to me this means that he is simply evil or sadistic.

Edited January 19, 2012 by seriously disabled

[Tres Juicy]

^^I agree with you. If there was a real God then there would not be so many people in horrific pain and in a state of perpetual suffering.

 

The fact that there is horrific suffering in the world and God does not absolutely nothing to help these people and make the world a better place for them, this to me proves that God simply does not exist.

 

 

Not only that, look at the atrocities comitted in the name of religion/god throughout history.

 

Like some of the crackpots you see here occasionally, they cannot accept other peoples beliefs and feel the need to force their perceived "truth" on others, all the while justifying it as "gods work"

 

It takes something incredibly twisted to do such harm to humanity and pass it off as good

Edited January 19, 2012 by Tres Juicy

[Dekan]

^^I agree with you. If there was a real God then there would not be so many people in horrible pain and in a state of perpetual suffering.

 

The fact that there is horrible suffering in the world and God does absolutely nothing to help those poor people and make the world a better place for them, this to me proves that God simply does not exist. And even if somehow he does exist, then to me this means that he is simply evil or sadistic.

 

But God doesn't actually cause all the suffering in the world. The suffering results from people, of their own free-will, choosing to do horrible things to one another. Like fighting wars, and committing atrocities.

 

God has done His best to stop us doing these things. By giving us the New Testament, and even sending His own son down to help us.

 

Also, by inspiring us to develope Science. If Science was used properly, it could make the Earth a true Paradise. With all 7 billion of Earth's people, enjoying a decent life.

 

If humans have screwed things up, that's our fault surely - isn't blaming God just a cop-out for our own incompetence?

[iNow]

But God doesn't actually cause all the suffering in the world. The suffering results from people, of their own free-will, choosing to do horrible things to one another. Like fighting wars, and committing atrocities.

 

God has done His best to stop us doing these things.

So, what you're saying then is that gods best isn't good enough? Interesting.

 

 

[Tres Juicy]

But God doesn't actually cause all the suffering in the world. The suffering results from people, of their own free-will, choosing to do horrible things to one another. Like fighting wars, and committing atrocities.

 

God has done His best to stop us doing these things. By giving us the New Testament, and even sending His own son down to help us.

 

Also, by inspiring us to develope Science. If Science was used properly, it could make the Earth a true Paradise. With all 7 billion of Earth's people, enjoying a decent life.

 

If humans have screwed things up, that's our fault surely - isn't blaming God just a cop-out for our own incompetence?

 

Clearly I am not blaming god, I'm saying that he does not exist.

 

As far as

inspiring us to develope Science

 

Have you read the crackpot religious posts here that dispute evolution and even gravity?

 

Religion has always held science back - look at history

[John Cuthber]

"God has done His best to stop us doing these things. By giving us the New Testament, and even sending His own son down to help us."

You mean He got it wrong when he wrote the Old Testament?

 

 

Incidentally, iNow, I'm surprised by your display of ignorance.

 

 

 

God takes a capital letter, even if you are an atheist (I don't worship the moon, but it's still Monday etc.) and possessive forms need an apostrophe.

 

So it's God's best that's not up to it.

[seriously disabled]

But God doesn't actually cause all the suffering in the world. The suffering results from people, of their own free-will, choosing to do horrible things to one another. Like fighting wars, and committing atrocities.

 

But what natural disasters like crop failures or earthquakes or diseases? Are these things also human fault?

 

Sure some suffering may be human fault but the vast majority of it is not.

Edited January 19, 2012 by seriously disabled

[Tres Juicy]

"God has done His best to stop us doing these things. By giving us the New Testament, and even sending His own son down to help us."

You mean He got it wrong when he wrote the Old Testament?

 

Incidentally, iNow, I'm surprised by your display of ignorance.

 

God takes a capital letter, even if you are an atheist (I don't worship the moon, but it's still Monday etc.) and possessive forms need an apostrophe.

 

So it's God's best that's not up to it.

 

Beside the point - what he said is spot on

[zapatos]

At the risk of bringing down a reign of abuse on my head...

 

I find it interesting. When discussing science, logical fallacies are consistently called out. People are very pedantic. Yet when it comes to criticizing religion the rules of argument seem to relax considerably. I think it only fair that criticism of the logic of theists be logical. The following are some examples of what I am talking about. Am I mistaken or does there seem to be a double standard? I'm happy for you to point out why I am wrong if I am. Maybe I'm just misunderstading.

 

On the other hand, religion has it's role too.

However, as far as I can see that's mainly wearing funny clothes, singing a lot and such.

 

I may be mistaken of course.

Perhaps someone would like to tell me what positive benefits religion brings.

Ridicule?

 

^^I agree with you. If there was a real God then there would not be so many people in horrible pain and in a state of perpetual suffering.

 

The fact that there is horrible suffering in the world and God does absolutely nothing to help those poor people and make the world a better place for them, this to me proves that God simply does not exist. And even if somehow he does exist, then to me this means that he is simply evil or sadistic.

A real God? True Scotsman?

 

How does God not alleviating suffering prove he does not exist? If you are confident he does not exist, then how can he be defined as evil or sadistic?

 

Not only that, look at the atrocities comitted in the name of religion/god throughout history.

 

Like some of the crackpots you see here occasionally, they cannot accept other peoples beliefs and feel the need to force their perceived "truth" on others, all the while justifying it as "gods work"

 

It takes something incredibly twisted to do such harm to humanity and pass it off as good

Pot calling the kettle black?

 

So, what you're saying then is that gods best isn't good enough? Interesting.

 

 

Strawman?

 

Clearly I am not blaming god, I'm saying that he does not exist.

 

As far as

 

 

Have you read the crackpot religious posts here that dispute evolution and even gravity?

 

Religion has always held science back - look at history

Always? Is that a bit of an exaggeration?

 

"God has done His best to stop us doing these things. By giving us the New Testament, and even sending His own son down to help us."

You mean He got it wrong when he wrote the Old Testament?

 

 

Strawman?

 

Sorry if I called it a logical fallacy when it was not, or used the wrong name. I'm working on learning logic more formally but am relatively new at it. The arguments did seem weak though. Like I said, I'm happy to hear why I'm wrong. I'm not trying to stir things up, it just appears to me that a double standard is being followed.