|
I'm not angry that there isn't much variety, as someone pointed out that the town is very small and probably very few people live there. But as an atheist, little things like this get on my nerves by constantly pushing the idea that by attending church and proclaiming yourself a christian you are somehow are better, more respectable person. Religious affiliation has zero control over how you behave, and even with many examples of this people still fail to realize it more often than not.
|
Glad to hear that they decided to not continue with it, wouldn't surprise me if they do something equally as stupid in the future though.
|
Haha I would totally choose this over jail time if the jail sentence was long enough...and I'm atheist.
|
On September 28 2011 22:23 DminusTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 22:12 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. Atheism isn't a religion.... Yeah it is. I believe its core theology is acting like a dick to everyone who self identifies as a religious person. Here take this pamphlet. Seriously though I'm not a religious person but I can see the merit in this if the person was seriously practicing the tenets of their faith. I mean believing you'll have to do penance in hell/purgatory for your life of crime is probably pretty good motivation to stop. My problem with this system is it seems pretty easy to abuse. But w/e there's no past history of people abusing religious power amirite? Oh wait...
You should look up atheism and then realize how silly you and other people are being for saying a lack of belief is in itself a belief....
|
On September 29 2011 02:57 cydial wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 22:23 DminusTerran wrote:On September 28 2011 22:12 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. Atheism isn't a religion.... Yeah it is. I believe its core theology is acting like a dick to everyone who self identifies as a religious person. Here take this pamphlet. Seriously though I'm not a religious person but I can see the merit in this if the person was seriously practicing the tenets of their faith. I mean believing you'll have to do penance in hell/purgatory for your life of crime is probably pretty good motivation to stop. My problem with this system is it seems pretty easy to abuse. But w/e there's no past history of people abusing religious power amirite? Oh wait... You should look up atheism and then realize how silly you and other people are being for saying a lack of belief is in itself a belief....
Atheism isn't a religion, but it does involve belief, or if you want you could call it "disbelief". Either way, it's an assertion about the nature of reality.
Disbelief is different from a lack of belief though, which would be a strong form of agnosticism (maybe closer to just apathy), in which there total lack of belief either way.
Belief and disbelief are polar opposites though, just as theism and atheism are polar opposites.
|
On September 29 2011 03:01 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 02:57 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 22:23 DminusTerran wrote:On September 28 2011 22:12 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. Atheism isn't a religion.... Yeah it is. I believe its core theology is acting like a dick to everyone who self identifies as a religious person. Here take this pamphlet. Seriously though I'm not a religious person but I can see the merit in this if the person was seriously practicing the tenets of their faith. I mean believing you'll have to do penance in hell/purgatory for your life of crime is probably pretty good motivation to stop. My problem with this system is it seems pretty easy to abuse. But w/e there's no past history of people abusing religious power amirite? Oh wait... You should look up atheism and then realize how silly you and other people are being for saying a lack of belief is in itself a belief.... Atheism isn't a religion, but it does involve belief, or if you want you could call it "disbelief". Either way, it's an assertion about the nature of reality. Disbelief is different from a lack of belief though, which would be agnosticism, in which the lack of belief is an admittance of ignorance.
When most people say atheism (myself included) they really mean nontheism, where they do not believe in any god or religion, but does not explicitly say that neither could exist. Atheism more literally means "anti-religion".
|
On September 29 2011 03:01 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 02:57 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 22:23 DminusTerran wrote:On September 28 2011 22:12 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. Atheism isn't a religion.... Yeah it is. I believe its core theology is acting like a dick to everyone who self identifies as a religious person. Here take this pamphlet. Seriously though I'm not a religious person but I can see the merit in this if the person was seriously practicing the tenets of their faith. I mean believing you'll have to do penance in hell/purgatory for your life of crime is probably pretty good motivation to stop. My problem with this system is it seems pretty easy to abuse. But w/e there's no past history of people abusing religious power amirite? Oh wait... You should look up atheism and then realize how silly you and other people are being for saying a lack of belief is in itself a belief.... Atheism isn't a religion, but it does involve belief, or if you want you could call it "disbelief". Either way, it's an assertion about the nature of reality. Disbelief is different from a lack of belief though, which would be agnosticism, in which the lack of belief is an admittance of ignorance.
You've managed to show that you misunderstand both atheism and agnosticism. Well done, sir.
User was warned for this post
|
On September 29 2011 03:05 Demonhunter04 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 03:01 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 29 2011 02:57 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 22:23 DminusTerran wrote:On September 28 2011 22:12 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. Atheism isn't a religion.... Yeah it is. I believe its core theology is acting like a dick to everyone who self identifies as a religious person. Here take this pamphlet. Seriously though I'm not a religious person but I can see the merit in this if the person was seriously practicing the tenets of their faith. I mean believing you'll have to do penance in hell/purgatory for your life of crime is probably pretty good motivation to stop. My problem with this system is it seems pretty easy to abuse. But w/e there's no past history of people abusing religious power amirite? Oh wait... You should look up atheism and then realize how silly you and other people are being for saying a lack of belief is in itself a belief.... Atheism isn't a religion, but it does involve belief, or if you want you could call it "disbelief". Either way, it's an assertion about the nature of reality. Disbelief is different from a lack of belief though, which would be agnosticism, in which the lack of belief is an admittance of ignorance. When most people say atheism (myself included) they really mean nontheism, where they do not believe in any god or religion, but does not explicitly say that neither could exist. Atheism more literally means "anti-religion".
You're defining a specific form of atheism known as "weak-atheism". That in no way is the definition of "atheism" as a whole. Atheism is simply the belief that a deity/deities do not exist (the actual literal meaning of it). It says nothing about whether or not that belief is based on certainty or not, which requires you to define a more specific form of atheism to do so.
On September 29 2011 03:05 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 03:01 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On September 29 2011 02:57 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 22:23 DminusTerran wrote:On September 28 2011 22:12 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. Atheism isn't a religion.... Yeah it is. I believe its core theology is acting like a dick to everyone who self identifies as a religious person. Here take this pamphlet. Seriously though I'm not a religious person but I can see the merit in this if the person was seriously practicing the tenets of their faith. I mean believing you'll have to do penance in hell/purgatory for your life of crime is probably pretty good motivation to stop. My problem with this system is it seems pretty easy to abuse. But w/e there's no past history of people abusing religious power amirite? Oh wait... You should look up atheism and then realize how silly you and other people are being for saying a lack of belief is in itself a belief.... Atheism isn't a religion, but it does involve belief, or if you want you could call it "disbelief". Either way, it's an assertion about the nature of reality. Disbelief is different from a lack of belief though, which would be agnosticism, in which the lack of belief is an admittance of ignorance. You've managed to show that you misunderstand both atheism and agnosticism. Well done, sir.
You've managed to make a post that would be equivalent to me saying:
"You are wrong and don't understand what you just said. Well done sir."
So, it doesn't really require me to refute it since it provided no insight whatsoever, just a personal insult to my understanding.
|
On September 28 2011 20:42 Nyct0 wrote:
this sounds like another way to force a religion on someone, going to church once a week won't stop you commiting crime lol.
Cause putting people behind bars seems to be so effective in correcting people.
|
On September 29 2011 03:11 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
You're defining a specific form of atheism known as "weak-atheism". That in no way is the definition of "atheism" as a whole. Atheism is simply the belief that a deity/deities do not exist. It says nothing about whether or not that belief is based on certainty or not, which requires you to define a more specific form of atheism to do so.
I'm pretty sure its also called nontheism. Unless you meant that being anti-religion was weak atheism...?
On September 29 2011 03:15 colossalgulp wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 20:42 Nyct0 wrote:
this sounds like another way to force a religion on someone, going to church once a week won't stop you commiting crime lol. Cause putting people behind bars seems to be so effective in correcting people.
However effective jail/prison is or isn't, church is far less likely to work.
|
On September 29 2011 03:19 Demonhunter04 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 03:15 colossalgulp wrote:
Cause putting people behind bars seems to be so effective in correcting people. However effective jail/prison is or isn't, church is far less likely to work.
You guys all know that it's not a dichotomy, right?
Everybody's all like CHURCH OR JAIL ARRRGGGH but the choices are:
1) Rehab (which the county judge thinks isn't good enough since it's only a 30-day program)
2) Jail
3) Fines
4) Church
|
On September 29 2011 03:23 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 03:19 Demonhunter04 wrote:On September 29 2011 03:15 colossalgulp wrote:
Cause putting people behind bars seems to be so effective in correcting people. However effective jail/prison is or isn't, church is far less likely to work. You guys all know that it's not a dichotomy, right? Everybody's all like CHURCH OR JAIL ARRRGGGH but the choices are: 1) Rehab (which the county judge thinks isn't good enough since it's only a 30-day program) 2) Jail 3) Fines 4) Church
Yes, we know this, but colossalgulp was implying in his statement that church might be equally ineffective in rehabilitating criminals as jail time. The fines aren't relevant to that.
|
On September 29 2011 03:19 Demonhunter04 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 03:11 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
You're defining a specific form of atheism known as "weak-atheism". That in no way is the definition of "atheism" as a whole. Atheism is simply the belief that a deity/deities do not exist. It says nothing about whether or not that belief is based on certainty or not, which requires you to define a more specific form of atheism to do so.
I'm pretty sure its also called nontheism. Unless you meant that being anti-religion was weak atheism...? Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 03:15 colossalgulp wrote:On September 28 2011 20:42 Nyct0 wrote:
this sounds like another way to force a religion on someone, going to church once a week won't stop you commiting crime lol. Cause putting people behind bars seems to be so effective in correcting people. However effective jail/prison is or isn't, church is far less likely to work.
If you looked up the terms before trying to correct people you would know what they mean. Atheism does not mean "anti-religion" at all, it is simply the lack of belief in a god.
|
On September 29 2011 02:57 cydial wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 22:23 DminusTerran wrote:On September 28 2011 22:12 cydial wrote:On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. Atheism isn't a religion.... Yeah it is. I believe its core theology is acting like a dick to everyone who self identifies as a religious person. Here take this pamphlet. Seriously though I'm not a religious person but I can see the merit in this if the person was seriously practicing the tenets of their faith. I mean believing you'll have to do penance in hell/purgatory for your life of crime is probably pretty good motivation to stop. My problem with this system is it seems pretty easy to abuse. But w/e there's no past history of people abusing religious power amirite? Oh wait... You should look up atheism and then realize how silly you and other people are being for saying a lack of belief is in itself a belief....
Yes, because the first line of that post was the height of seriousness. I realizes sarcasm/tone is harder comprehend when presented it written form, but really, that one seemed pretty obvious to me.
|
i'll take this over going to jail. i'm atheist but grew up going to church. going to church for me is no different than going to, say a retail store meeting.
no need for anti-religion towards this issue honestly. a smart man will go to church because it means nothing, i dont see how any atheist can be threatened by this, if anything, it can be taken advantage of regardless of religious belief.
|
On September 29 2011 03:49 Grokken wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 03:19 Demonhunter04 wrote:On September 29 2011 03:11 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
You're defining a specific form of atheism known as "weak-atheism". That in no way is the definition of "atheism" as a whole. Atheism is simply the belief that a deity/deities do not exist. It says nothing about whether or not that belief is based on certainty or not, which requires you to define a more specific form of atheism to do so.
I'm pretty sure its also called nontheism. Unless you meant that being anti-religion was weak atheism...? On September 29 2011 03:15 colossalgulp wrote:On September 28 2011 20:42 Nyct0 wrote:
this sounds like another way to force a religion on someone, going to church once a week won't stop you commiting crime lol. Cause putting people behind bars seems to be so effective in correcting people. However effective jail/prison is or isn't, church is far less likely to work. If you looked up the terms before trying to correct people you would know what they mean. Atheism does not mean "anti-religion" at all, it is simply the lack of belief in a god.
It's the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. The lack of a belief in god is nontheism.
|
On September 28 2011 20:45 naggerNZ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 20:05 KwarK wrote:
As long as you can do it for every religion (atheism included) then sure, whatever works for them. If you can only do it for Christianity then it's giving Christians preferential penal treatment which is obviously unfair. In which case I demand to be released into the custody of the Church of my religion, icecreamtology. The church is my house and I am required by my faith to consume five pounds of icecream every sunday. ... You obviously do not understand how separation of church and state works.
I frequent the Church of Aiur. Is there a Church of Aiur in Alabama?
|
I think its amusing that going to church is seen as equivalent to jail time...but I suppose in this case its really about rehabilitation rather than deterrence. I am curious why the ACLU is so against it...its an option, no one is forcing them to go to church. But perhaps the thinking is that, its such an easy, lesser sentence than jail time or paying a fine, that the local authorities are essentially supporting intervention through religion rather than through typical methods.
I guess it depends what they teach at the church. But its hard to believe that they won't involve Jesus/God in some way, and try to influence the people forced to go there through religious arguments.
I don't know where to stand on this issue. I know these people are grown adults, and can think for themselves...but still a lot of people can be easily influenced, especially if they're still young adults. At the same time, reading Jibba's posts, if they have almost no resources at their disposal, the risk of such influence may be a small price to pay if the message is a good one overall.
I just hope that this won't be used as a case to allow the same thing to happen in other municipalities on larger scales. Having an increasingly intertwined church and state is a scary idea, even if the end result is unlikely.
|
The online time i've been to church was because my stepgrandmother saw me playing D2 while babysitting me, and forced me to go as "punishment" because apparently it isn't in line with her ideas of catholisism. I got kicked out for being loud and saying it was boring. Jail it is i guess..
|
Honestly. It's a better idea than jailing people for non-violent offenses. I can see the ACLU's point but even being an atheist myself I just see it as a practical solution to what comes down to a budget crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
