Atheism

[Cress]

The topic comes up a little bit more in my school because I go to a Catholic school...it makes religion class very difficult for me, but mostly I just parrot back what they want to hear and leave my beliefs out of it, cause I don't want to get into a huge debate with one of my teachers. Of course every now and then it's fun to make fun of myself. "I'M A HERETIC!!!!!!!"

[Not So Silent One]

I go to a Catholic school too, and I love it there (the uniforms could be a slight change, but they're better than some)and religion class is horrid, and I'm catholic, mainly because my teacher is in his second year in teaching and is all nervous. Though I feel really sorry for him, he's just teaching about what he believes in, and my class is so mean to him. No one likes him, except for the few who are his "fan-club" and its really sad as he is an amazing person and really nice. All he wants to do is give his like opinion on what he believes, and actually have someone listen. But I will admit, the "fights we get into can be really fun, as I have some really "special" (I think some know what I mean) kids in my class.


I've been confirmed now, and I kinda want to like end it. The more I think about this the more I really wonder what I think is true, and what is simply an influence from others. But evil parents will kill me and pull me from my current school and I really don't want that, I love the kids there, they are awsome so I really have to go against my username and shut up right now.

[Lamae]

Lamarquise, You go girl!

(Originally posted by bluesalamanders)
Where did you get these quotes from? I searched for them, and the only websites most (though not all) of them were on were religious sites.

Would not quotes supporting religion be found on religious sites? I certainly wouldn't expect to find anything promoting religion in anyplace who denies the very existance of God.

(originally posted by Sean L.)
Well golly wiz, you delivered it right into my hands. You get slammed because you do this. Doesn't matter if you're 'following' your religion when you're breaking some nice social and moral codes to butt out of your neighbor's business - especially the ones that come back time after time and threaten you that if you don't follow god, you'll burn in all manner of ways.You wouldn't get "slammed", as you say, if you believed a bit more in loving thy neighbor for who they were instead of repeating coming back to drive us into the fold like so many more sheep after we've repeatedly said no.

In the first place Onua Wingstar said herself:

That being said, I am not one of the "shout it from the mountains" evangelical Christians who goes around trying to convert everyone,

We get "slammed" because we do what? Post on a discussion forum? Look, I'm really sorry if you've had some bad experiences in the past but not all religious people are the kind that want to bang your door down and threaten you. Do people really do that over in New Jersey??

In addition I've gotten my share of harassment from atheists. For instance, just last year, I was sitting with my friends eating lunch at school. and this guy stops, sets down his tray at our table, and starts screaming about how the Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints(Mormons) are all (insert chosen string of profanity here)and we were all misguided freaks, because there was no God. I had never seen the guy before. He continued to say that we Mormons were wrecking his family because we belive in God.(As to how that works i'm a little confused...) On, and on and on! I don't bash other people's beliefs and certainly wasn't butting intohis buisiness, and I got "slammed". I do believe in loving my neighbors and it is not my intention intend to be pushy or "drive" anybody anywhere.

[Cress]

I have to say, I've never met an atheist who was screaming their beliefs at someone. Mostly cause atheists don't feel they have anything to preach to anyone. I have however been approached by multiple people telling me to accept Jesus and that he was the only way to be saved. Never an atheist though...that's just my experience though.
Most people who randomly approach strangers on the street are kind of crazy though, no matter what they're saying.

[bluesalamanders]

Lamae said:
Would not quotes supporting religion be found on religious sites? I certainly wouldn't expect to find anything promoting religion in anyplace who denies the very existance of God.

My issue is not that I didn't find the same quotes on atheist websites. It's that I didn't find the same quotes on regular, non-religious quote websites. They were only on religion sites. That makes me question their validity. Particularly since, in some cases, I found other websites saying "that quote was never verified as actually by that person".


I won't deny that there are a few screaming atheists out there, and they give the rest of us a bad name. But that's one - one - example of a random person coming up to you like that. Over the years, I have had dozens of Christians of various sects preach at me and "try to convert me". People knocking on my door. People coming up to me on the street. When I was in middle school and stayed with a family on a choir trip, the father in that family, he's the first I remember. Even people I once considered my friends - at least three of them I can think of off hand. So the argument that "atheists do it to" isn't a very strong one.

Anna N.

[Frivs]

hrm. I think maybe I replied to this before, somewhere in the front pages, but that may just be my imagination, and I'm too lazy to look at the moment :P

I do, however, have a couple things to say:

I applaud most of the people here for taking a civilized approach to this conversation. Too often topics like these turn into flaming wars, which is why most boards ban them in general.

That said, I hope everyone who reads my following opinions know that I have no intention or interest in starting anything

SO, "what" is Piper, you wonder? Piper is me. I have no religion, and no non-religion either, This is mostly, and almost entirely, because I personally believe the whole system sucks. Not only does it create prejudice, generalizations, stereotypes, and anymosity between different "groups", it is sorely abused by a great many people as an excuse to hurt people. Please, please don't think I hate religious people, because I don't, and I also don't think that every religious person is mean or bad or whatever, or that every church is. But if the world stopped paying so much attention to religion, there would be a lot less death. Religion is, in my opinion, just as much an overused excuse for people to hurt as race or sexual orientation.


Unfortunately, there is also a large number of people in this world who seem to think that it's their way or no way, and I'm talking about religious and non-religious people, it happens on both sides. Now, either side doing this is ridiculous because a) most of the common religions I've seen say something about loving your neighbor and b) it is highly hypocritical to complain about people trying to convert you, then try to get them to change their own beliefs. I will never say that the religious do it more than the non-religious, because until I have met every person in the world I have no grounds to say so. BUT, I will let you know that I have never had an atheist at my door with a pamphlet.

As far as the Pledge goes, I made a personal decision about two years ago not to say it. Why? Because it directly contradicts United States law (religion and government kept a part), and I do not believe I should have to mention anything about mine or anyone else's religion while talking about my country. That's the point of having a free country. It has nothing to do with whether I believe in God or not, it still just doesn't jive with the basic laws of our country. And, just an interesting bit of information, the person who wrote the pledge was a bishop, and even he did not include that line.

SO, getting back to the orginal topic of the thread: You do not have to believe in God to have morals, and frankly, if fear of "Hell" is the only thing keeping you from killing people, we're in trouble. I personally believe that having morals because you have a sense of what's right and what's wrong is a lot better than having them because you're afriad of an evil angel who got kicked out of the fancy hotel. I'm not saying that's the only reason religious people have them, but if you want to argue that that's why non-religious don't...

And before anyone says something about how I don't know what I'm talking about because I never went to church (not that anyone would, I hope ), I was raised Mormon, and an entire half of my family still is. I've been on both sides of the coin. Why I left is really not a good discussion for this board, so I won't get into that.

*looks up* Oi! Lots of writing XD But that's what happens when a writer replies to a post, lol I can only hope someone got something out of all that :P

[minionofdoom]

hmmm...personally I think that religion isn't a bad thing most of the time. The only problem is when people use religion to do horrid things like burn books or say things like "all muslims,gay people and atheists are going to burn in hell and I will laugh" or just be impossibly unkind.

[the_peridexis]

This is a very complex topic. :P I have nothing against Athiests, and nothing against Athiesm. That's their choice, and I think it's wrong to go around trying to convert people, not to mention highly annoying. I don't feel like metioning what my religion is, just because it complicates matters. And if you have good morals, then it doesn't matter what faith you have anyway.

I do have a faith, so yes, I believe in God. I don't think He is some benevolent being ruling over us, sending us to Hell if we're bad. I do believe He made us, and everything. I've nothing against people who believe otherwise. A lot of my friends are "faithless", and many are really amazing people. I do get kind of confused sometimes, though, about how they think. For those things that science can't explain, what can explain them? Now, don't get me wrong, science is great; it's one of my favorite subjects and very fascinating. Yeah, in 1,000 years we're going to have a lot of the universe's mysteries solved, but some things we're never going to be able to explain. I can't say exactly what, but when scientists finally sit back at a loss...

About the whole Pledge thing? I completely agree that the "under God" part is unnecessary. I have a religion, and I don't say it. There's a lot more to say, but it's hard to put into words all at once, so I'll leave it at that. I hope that I haven't offended anyone, bacause most of you are people I geuinely respect as friends.

-peri

[bluesalamanders]

Science can explain everything. I do not believe that there is anything that science can't explain.

There are only things that science can't explain now.

And possibly some things that we as humans (we little specks in the enormous universe) can't wrap our brains around. But that doesn't mean they're not explainable, or that they don't fit in somehow with the rest of science as we do/will understand it.

Blue~

[What\'s up, doc?]

I don't really agree to you much on that point, though it does makes some sense. Science cannot explain science itself.

We can explain that less dense molecules rise, but can we explain why it rises?? We can understand about the human mind (the great mind) but can we explain why it is the shape and size that it is?? (It is not as if the brain itself has the right to say that it wants that particular shape and size, or that we can shape it to our needs.) We know about diffusion that causes the spread of molecules, but we cannot explain why molecules go from high to low concentration (not taking into consideration the energy-using process called active transport) In the end, everything comes down to the problem of creation, So science cannot really explain itself, can it??

Back to the subject at hand, I still think that it is up to the individual as to whether or not to believe in whomever or whatever they choose, and others should not have a say in that belief or non-belief. (Peri, I really agree with you that trying to convert people is highly annoying!!)Afterall, everyone believes in something, religion or science. I don't think anyone really believes in absolutely nothing at all.

I get a feeling I don't really understand fully what I'm talking about

[bluesalamanders]

doc -

I don't understand what you're asking. What does "science can't explain itself" mean?

And all those other things may be things that science can't explain now, but that doesn't mean that we won't discover the explanation one day in the future. The beauty of science is how it grows.

Belief in science is a different from belief in religion. Science grows and changes. Also, science can be tested - in fact, it must be. Religions, most religions anyway, refuse questioning and testing. And they definitely oppose change.

Blue~

[the_peridexis]

"Most religions, anyway" being the key words. =) And actually, doc, the shape of the brain CAN be explained by science, and pretty well. I've seen a doc (as in a documentary) on it, and read some random stuff on detailed human evolution. To put it simply, the entire head (of a human) was once a rather too bulky, with too much weight in the back, where the skull was thickest, which, when we moved, joggled the brain around too much. Over time, the shape of the skull, and therefore the shape of the brain, corrected itself so that we can move around smoothly. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, of course.

-peri

[bluesalamanders]

Show me a religion - a god-based religion - that can stand up to real scientific testing. Please.

Some religions encourage (or encouraged) questioning, such as Judaism (in the past, not as much now), but almost none do anymore, and even if they did/do, they simply can't hold up to scientific testing.

Blue~

[Peter Murray]

Originally posted by What's up, doc?:
Science cannot explain science itself.

What's supposed to need explaining?

We can explain that less dense molecules rise, but can we explain why it rises??

It's a long time (30 years) since I had a science lesson, but as far as I can remember, brownian motion means that the denser molecules tend to end up beneath the less dense ones. Thus the less dense ones seem to rise.

Peri answered the brain one.

We know about diffusion that causes the spread of molecules, but we cannot explain why molecules go from high to low concentration (not taking into consideration the energy-using process called active transport)

I think this is more of that brownian motion + statistics. On average, random motion averages out the concentration, as it has no mechanism to preserve an area of high concentration.

In the end, everything comes down to the problem of creation, So science cannot really explain itself, can it??

But until religion explains gods, religion doesn't explain creation either.

[Gryphon]

doc:
Science cannot explain science itself.

No comprende? I don't understand the point that you're trying to make. Are you trying to argue against science? And I'd like to ask what would qualify as science explaining itself.

Also, some of the points you make are... can't think of a good word... without foundation? Like you're pulling stuff out of your head, but you don't actually know what you're talking about. But first, let me explain my stance. I'm an AP Biology student, which is a course that goes in depth about organisms and biological processes all the way down to the molecular level. It's hardcore. :P

Because I don't have a lot of time, I'll just get to the root of your arguement.

doc:
In the end, everything comes down to the problem of creation

People used to beleive that organisms were imbued with life, and that there were organic molecules which could only be created by living creatures. Take glucose or proteins for an example. In one expirement, scientists disproved all of that by creating urea in a lab, without the help of organisms. Later, people proposed ideas of how life could have started, but no one can really know for sure because it was so long ago. Instead of discussing the theories themselves, I'll just say this: all evolution needed was a means of replication, such as DNA and RNA, which can easily create virtual copies of themselves via complementary strands. Along with the necesity of replication, evolution also needs a way to create change, which would be the mistakes when strands are copied over, and this occurs at a relatively constant rate.

nnn I don't have any more time left, but...
I honestly don't care what religion you are. All that matters is that you do your best to be a good person who cares about other people.


Ughgughgh okay, five more minutes. Diffusion works like this. Okay, so take air, for an example. The particles are in a constant state of motion; they're jostling around. Even solid things are, but at a much slower rate, which is why they're solid. However, the direction they move around in is completely random. If you have a densely packed cluster of oxygen molecules floating around, it's simple probability that it'll float away from its peers. Let me try to explain in another way.


You've got your dude "X." He's on the outskirts of the cluster of other Xs. He can go up, down, left, right, diagonal, backwards, forwards. You name the direction. But all of his buddies are to his left. He's got a better chance of picking some direction other than the ones with his buddies. You know that molecules move around; the diffusion to a lower concentration is something that happens simply because of probability, even if it's hard to explain. Also, when you consider X, also know that all of his buddies are also flying off in random directions; the chance that all of them will fly towards each other instead of scatter is very unlikely.