|
what?
atheists dont need to justify killing?
we're all just barbarous amoral heathens if we abandon the bible huh?
how exactly did the jews make it to mount sinai while thinking it was ok to rape and kill and steal amongst themselves?
how is communism an atheist system?
http://atheism.about.com/od/thebible/a/communism.htm
jesus seems rather red to me.
most of the communist regimes also happened to be atheistic, but theres no reasonable causal link there.
just as there is no causal link between atheism itself and stalin's persecution of religion, religion is a great source of power for the people at the head of it, which means you either have to take control of it or eliminate it. you really claim that religious extremists are motivated solely by practical purposes and then try to assign blame for stalin and mao and whatnot to atheism?
im not even sure how atheism could motivate action, as it isnt actually a belief. its a lack thereof. 'militant' atheists like dawkins and harris speak out against religion, not for atheism, atheism is just the result of giving up religion. they are fighting against the effects of belief, not in defense of their own.
when a bunch of atheists start riots and kill people because someone makes a comic about the flying spaghetti monster, then you might have an argument on that front. until then, no.
|
Come on idra, I made it clear that morals are completely separate from atheism. I was not implying that atheists cannot be moral. In fact I wasn't even implying that the vast majority weren't moral. He asked my how it could logically be justified and I told him.
You're right, atheism doesn't motivate action. In fact I said that is how it can justify killing, etc, because it in fact does not need to be justified (again, when you add in morals which the vast majority of atheists have, then it does in fact need to be justified).
And finally, I will even say that you are right that there is not causal relationship between atheism and communism and the things that come along with it. In those cases simply allows atrocities to be justified in its own twisted way. I really doubt the state truely cares about any specific belief system anyways, they use whatever controls people (many times religion).
So in conclusion, I'm saying people will do bad things to other people regardless of their religion or lack there of.
|
On March 30 2009 23:17 fight_or_flight wrote:
Come on idra, I made it clear that morals are completely separate from atheism. I was not implying that atheists cannot be moral. In fact I wasn't even implying that the vast majority weren't moral. He asked my how it could logically be justified and I told him.
The point is an atheist generally doesn't need to justify killing because there is nothing to justify. Of course most have added morals, so they may or may not feel guilty over such an action.
generally doesnt need to justify killing certainly implies that most atheists are amoral, which is utterly idiotic. do you stone people for working on the sabbath? you dont get your morals from the bible either.
You're right, atheism doesn't motivate action. In fact I said that is how it can justify killing, etc, because it in fact does not need to be justified (again, when you add in morals which the vast majority of atheists have, then it does in fact need to be justified).
so basically your whole point was that if atheists were amoral then this would be true, but then you say most atheists are moral so.. you have no point?
And finally, I will even say that you are right that there is not causal relationship between atheism and communism and the things that come along with it. In those cases simply allows atrocities to be justified in its own twisted way. I really doubt the state truely cares about any specific belief system anyways, they use whatever controls people (many times religion).
so basically everything you said..... was flat out wrong. nifty. how does atheism help to justify it? you just said that atheists arent generally amoral.
So in conclusion, I'm saying people will do bad things to other people regardless of their religion or lack there of.
sounds like you werent really saying anything at all
|
So in conclusion, I'm saying people will do bad things to other people regardless of their religion or lack there of.
Well gee, thanks for clearing that up
|
Let me go back to the original question here.
On March 30 2009 18:28 Etherone wrote:
why is it worst to be an atheist (which is one extreme in a spectrum of beliefs) than to be a religious fanatic?( which is the other extreme)
simply because they are the 2 extremes does not in any way shape or form define them as "just as bad"
a fanatic can justify killing, or worse, through his religious beliefs.
Can an Atheist? well this question i will answer for you. No, an Atheist cannot.
so again, just to be clear, tell me why exactly is it that an Atheist is "just as bad" as a religious fanatic?
I believe I have been arguing against this assumption statement which isn't very clear. I've been trying to show how the worst religious fanatics and the worst atheists can both easily justify their actions. I'm not making general accusations here. Thats why it is important to distinguish morals from atheism, etc.
And are you saying all religious fanatics will kill people? Arguing that atheists constitute one end of the spectrum, and "religious fanatics" are the equivalent version of the other end is a false pretense. What percentage of people who don't believe in god label themselves as an atheist? (a pretty good portion) What percentage of religious people label themselves as extremists? (very few)
So my whole argument is based on showing that the worst individuals on either spectrum have justifications to do what they do. Idra, you are right, religious people do have morals. However, do extremists? I think we can safely agree that the worst extremists and worst atheists don't have morals.
On March 31 2009 00:43 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2009 23:17 fight_or_flight wrote:
Come on idra, I made it clear that morals are completely separate from atheism. I was not implying that atheists cannot be moral. In fact I wasn't even implying that the vast majority weren't moral. He asked my how it could logically be justified and I told him. Show nested quote +The point is an atheist generally doesn't need to justify killing because there is nothing to justify. Of course most have added morals, so they may or may not feel guilty over such an action. generally doesnt need to justify killing certainly implies that most atheists are amoral, which is utterly idiotic. do you stone people for working on the sabbath? you dont get your morals from the bible either.
You're right, atheism doesn't motivate action. In fact I said that is how it can justify killing, etc, because it in fact does not need to be justified (again, when you add in morals which the vast majority of atheists have, then it does in fact need to be justified).
so basically your whole point was that if atheists were amoral then this would be true, but then you say most atheists are moral so.. you have no point?[/quote]
The original argument was comparing to religious extremist. I'm talking about the minority who do bad things. You must agree that some atheists are amoral. Satanists are a good example of this. How many athiests are satanists? probably very few! but they do exist. This is the minority is the group I am comparing to the "religious extremists".
More mainstream examples (which could be likened to fundamentalist but not extremists religious people) would be the people who want to exterminate all humans, to eugenics, to partial birth abortion, to abortion. A cluster of cells is the amoral view of life, for example. I'm just giving a sliding scale here, try to view it objectively.
Show nested quote +
And finally, I will even say that you are right that there is not causal relationship between atheism and communism and the things that come along with it. In those cases simply allows atrocities to be justified in its own twisted way. I really doubt the state truely cares about any specific belief system anyways, they use whatever controls people (many times religion).
so basically everything you said..... was flat out wrong. nifty. how does atheism help to justify it? you just said that atheists arent generally amoral.
Atheism is simply the vehicle used because it tends to be more collectivist. It is more a worship of the state (in this circumstance I'm not saying all atheism is the same) and personality cults, which use atheism as a means to push religion out than anything else.
In this collectivist mindset, it seems much easier to get people to commit atrocities. Even ideas such as human culling are gaining ground today.
But the fact is that millions of people killed each other in that part of history, and they justified their actions. So really without understanding the collectivist mindset, you could easily say that this proves that whatever belief system they operated under allowed them, at the very least, to justify their actions. Whether it was God telling them to do it, or Father Stalin in some weird quasi-atheist mass psychosis, history should dictate to you that their belief system allowed it because (1) it was their belief system and (2) it happened on a massive scale. Me explaining to you the mechanics of how it happened should be secondary.
Show nested quote +
So in conclusion, I'm saying people will do bad things to other people regardless of their religion or lack there of.
sounds like you werent really saying anything at all
Well its what happens when you argue against an absolute statement such as thsi
"a fanatic can justify killing, or worse, through his religious beliefs.
Can an Atheist? well this question i will answer for you. No, an Atheist cannot."
It should be obvious that one form of mind control is no better than another. Established religions and ideologies are both forms of mind control. Spirituality and morals are not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
