Are atheists less civilized than normal members of society? - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For discussion of moral and ethical issues.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14860548
@Godstud

There is a minority of religious people here on PoFo and even a less amount of people who think that atheists are sub-human. If you ignore it, it should go away for good. Nothing will be gained but ridicule and circlejerking. By taking it seriously you both legitimatize such a way of thinking and spread it as a source of legitimate thought.
#14860610
Rugoz wrote:Representative democracy has become synonymous with democracy, but that's a relatively new phenomena (19th/20th century). That's why Madison makes the distinction between republic and democracy.


Thanks. Perhaps this will clarify why some US conservatives use this term in a different way than the rest of us.
#14860644
Sivad wrote:But not being influenced by ancient writings, that you're taught to hold sacred, does give the non-religious a head-start. They can just ask "what is best for people?", and think, based on evidence from the modern world, while religions are held back by "but 2,000 years ago, my god said ...".

Not necessarily, atheists aren't bound to any form of consequentialism. Atheists might not consider something like homosexuality a sin, but they could still regard it as immoral. You're assuming all atheists share your ethical intuitions and that just isn't the case.

No, I'm not assuming that. I'm saying that having to use, as a basis, all of moral ideas from 2,000 years ago is an impediment to a good outcome now. This is why I called not having that baggage a "head-start".
#14861683
Atheists are the best, since they don't have archaic rules and religious laws that they have to follow blindly. They can use their brains, instead of ancient tomes.


We are all waiting breathlessly for that to happen.

I live how atheists (I'm looking at you PI) like to use the Bible to define Christianity and the Koran Islam, etc. Of course modern religions do not follow the rules that PI points out. The overwhelming majority of Christians, to use his example, abhor slavery and believe in the equality of the sexes. Even those who don't believe in the equality of the sexes can join a group of atheists who believe the same way. I give you as an example, the set of all atheists who voted for Trump.

I am persuaded that these endless threads are, as Oxymandias, said, atheists looking for self-validation.

Atheists pride themselves on their so-called objectivity yet there is practically no objective recognition on their part of the immense good religion does every day. I am not speaking of theoretical good, I am speaking of actual good...Hospitals, feeding projects, refugee programs, etc. Short of "oh yea, I know but...." they are mute on the subject.

Atheists, for all their pride in their intellectualism, seek the worst examples in religion to make their case and ignore the best. They are just as faith-based as religious are. They just don't know it. Or if they do won't admit it because it kinda' destroys their world view.
#14861693
Drlee wrote:Atheists, for all their pride in their intellectualism, seek the worst examples in religion to make their case and ignore the best. They are just as faith-based as religious are. They just don't know it. Or if they do won't admit it because it kinda' destroys their world view.
:lol: No... Just no.

Atheists do know that most religious people aren't that bad, but there's a recurrent theme amongst most religiond: Intolerance.
#14861829
Godstud said: Atheists do know that most religious people aren't that bad...


I think the correct response to this should be, "I rest my case".

But I can't but add this, among your many religiously bigoted posts: "Judge yourself, not me. I may not be a Christian, because I wouldn't want to be associated with such low-lives.....".
#14861831
@Drlee In my defense, I was responding to Hindsite, so I tend to go a bit over-the-top when dealing with religious extremist fundamentalists. I take the extreme view, and I have to learn to stop doing so. :hmm:

When it comes to religion, moderates are the best representation of their religions. The fundamentalists are the least humane, most intolerant, and collectively vile.
#14861842
When it comes to religion, moderates are the best representation of their religions. The fundamentalists are the least humane, most intolerant, and collectively vile.


I couldn't help but tweak you with that post of yours. 8) I completely understand. That said.

I do not disagree with you. I find fundamentalists to be intolerant. Many are capable of great acts of kindness but their definition of kindness would not square with yours or mine. Vile though? That is a bit much.
#14863446
I think there may have been some "first wave" atheists who behaved themselves pretty well as a group. The internet has unleashed second wave atheists who are often pretty horrible people. Or maybe these are just descendants of the first wave ones who themselves came from a more dignified culture.
#14863455
Some people are horrible and it has nothing to do with religion, or lack thereof. People are no less, or no more horrible than they have always been.

Most Atheist, like most religious people, are good because they've grown up in a society with laws, rights, and rules. That's where people learn their "civilizing" stuff. We're molded by our environment, mostly.
#14981880
Oxymandias wrote:@Godstud

There is a minority of religious people here on PoFo and even a less amount of people who think that atheists are sub-human. If you ignore it, it should go away for good. Nothing will be gained but ridicule and circlejerking. By taking it seriously you both legitimatize such a way of thinking and spread it as a source of legitimate thought.


All thought is legitimate.
#14982229
I'm going to say no. I will go further and say that civility and stance on religion are mutually exclusive.


Then again, I don't like to call myself atheist, because I feel like Atheists have a habit of being militant with their beliefs. Although I am agnostic/atheist, I do recognize that the world needs religion. We are better off with religion than without it. Many Atheists would want to skewer me for saying such a thing.
Last edited by Rancid on 23 Jan 2019 15:05, edited 1 time in total.
#14982231
If you focus that argument on the lower-classes and exclude the middle and upper-classes, then I think you can possibly say yes. It depends on which social demographic you refer to. There are social demographics for which religion has a very positive civilising role, compare an atheist chav family to a poor religious family, the chav family is being raised like in a stable while the poor religious family is being raised with a moral compass and social rules. And there are other social demographics for whom religion has a net negative impact.
#14982293
Saeko wrote:Legitimate doesn't mean true.


It doesn't have to.

To say that all thought is legitimate; would still legitimize the opposite claim as it is a thought; therefore creating a contradiction.

Or am I missing something?
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 28

The rapes by Hamas, real or imagained are irreleva[…]

@Rugoz You are a fuckin' moralist, Russia coul[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]