I agree with some of your points Will, but I don't believe that Atheism is faith, as such. Go to www.tv-links.co.uk and check out the Richard Dawkins documentaries (He discusses faith in great detail) - he is a very wise and intelligent man. I love watching his debates. Whenever I watch the TV debates or online documentaries, where there is a significant theist presence, I notice, increasingly, that they fall short of his meanings - they don't really look at the definitions and technicalities behind his points; instead they use what they think are the correct definitions to his statements and use that to argue with. I believe "faith" is a very ambiguous and often misunderstood word, and many philosophers have given great insight into the scientific definition, possible connotations and the common misunderstandings concerning the word and meaning. I've been atheist for as long as I can remember. It was not a sudden rebellious act I decided to adhere to one day, it was just a gradual and logical awareness of what God stands for and in return expects of us as humans. I think it takes someone to suspend all possible controversies and analyse the bare facts, to be able to look at arguments in a completely non-bias way. For one would be chasing their tail so-to-speak if debating someone with obvious religious dogma instilled within them. Tell me Will, out of genuine interest, as an atheist what are your thoughts on Nihilism?
First of all let's establish who is the liar. In another thread your words were: "I have wondered about god about the same amount of time i have wondered about pixies, fairies, elves, goblins or any other kind of fabricated mythical creature. Which is not very much." http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=482169&highlight=fairy&page=3 post #57 It seems to me you think quite a lot about this subject even though you denied it above. Everytime there is a thread about God, you always show up. Which clearly proves you are a liar when you say you don't think about it very much. OR, you must be thinking a lot about fairies in which case you are nuts. So liar or nuts? Your constant fight to disprove God reminds me of this old Russian dude: Dude, one of the words to describe us Christians is believers. An old Russian guy was asked once by an atheist: "How can you believe in God? Have you ever seen God?" The old Russian guy replied: "I have never seen God in my life. I have also never seen a Japanese in my life either, but I know that Japanese exist because our Russian army fought them in the war. I know God exists because you atheists are always always fighting to disprove His existence." And this thing with communism, in 50 years alone they killed more than ALL the religious wars combined together in the whole history of man kind. 50 years!!! Aren't you glad you no longer have the atheists/communists in power. Like I said to you, applying the same logic, even the Inquisitors (which let's see how much history you know how many have they killed??) let you keep your belongings if you converted, unlike the atheists. These atheists believed they are not responsible or accountable to anyone. Growing up as a kid in a communist country I always knew law 17. Which meant if you work hard and you manage to put a buck aside they start hitting you with another tax to make sure you only earn a certain amount of dough. Think about it, under communism you had only ONE party that dictates what you should think and do because they are the ONLY ones that are right. Anyway, over all, I take the religion over atheism.
Please ProteinDude, at least call them Socialist states. I clearly defined the differences previously.
Please Brum, become a little more realistic. After all, that is what an atheist should do. Isn't this what atheist boast of? What you reckon? Let me tell you, when others take over your house (my great grandfathers's) and they let you live in only a part of it, and then they put bars in some of the back rooms and bring in peasants and belt them severely who would not "voluntarily" give up their land and join the group, let me tell you, that is when you become a realist and see it for what it is.
Right... I was just asking that you use a correct term mate, of which, is being realistic. By definition, using incorrect terms isn't realistic, no? I sympathise the pains of your experiences, but that has nothing to do with what I have been posting for some time. I'm sure there have been horrific events in your past, but how does that mean they were Communists? Do I have to get out the wiki quotes again? Socialism: The above is what you have endured: The "voluntary" submission of production and materialism for the state to distribute. Communism (Marxism): There's a stark difference between "public ownership" and "common ownership". The first being state controlled and the latter being free to everyone. What you describe sounds like everything was given up to the state, right? If so, that by definition is Socialism. I'm only making these points because virtually everyone gives Communism and Communists a bad name. We need to clear our name and let people know that often enough, those who claim to be Communists are actually Socialists.
Maybe I'm wrong, But the original question seemed to be a question about how much time you contemplate the existence of god. Which would be not very much at all. it doesn't take long, after you observe the 100% lack of evidence, To come to the conclusion that something doesn't exist. If you were to ask me how many times i have thought about god, religion and it's effect on society and individuals i would say quite a lot. It's a result of having western traditions and religions shoved down my throat on a daily basis.
Really? Well if that's a problem for you then why don't you go back to the desert to be with your friends? Whining about that is as retarded as whining that when I go to Disneyland I get cutsy wutsy shoved down my throat all day long. If I don't want cutsy wutsy all day long, get this, I DON'T LIVE THERE
They have religion in the desert too. If i lived there i would be opposing having their god shoved down my throat. The point is that i don't care what you believe, You can believe any nonsensical, illogical childish bullshit that you want, But do two things. 1) stfu and don't talk to me about it and 2) don't try to change laws, public policy or children's education based on it. Do them two things and you can keep your invisible sky daddy.
I think you are trying to slinece KalvinB. What you're saying is your atheistic view should prevail over the religious view. What you're saying is the religious should shut up because an atheist says so. My logical question is this: if you believe in the theory of evolution which keeps changing every day, why must one listen to you. How do we know you're "evolved" enough to make decisions? After all, as an atheist you're just a bunch of atoms or whatever just glued together with no purpose whatsoever on this planet.
Despite being atheist, I acknowledge your constitutional right to freedom of religious choice, and while I may not agree with your religion, I'd fight for you to keep the right. However, am I right in understanding that people also have the right to freedom from religion also? Ah, we're getting on to Evolution now are we... ProteinDude, the Fact & Theory of evolution (of which, it is both) does not change every day. The last significant changes were some time ago. So please, read first. Furthermore, what's your point that we have no purpose? I believe we don't, so? Answering your question (which seems to ill-fit evolution into it somehow) no-one has to listen to anyone. Pretty simple enough. Your remark regarding Atomic structures, please tell me you're not going to attempt to disprove the presence of atomic forces and subatomic particles... Hmm.. the "or whatever" part of your sentence really has not done you any favours. It shows the lack of knowledge you have in the area, yet you still would like to challenge it. It seems as if you implied that only Atheists consist of Atoms. Now that is funny!
The theory doesn't change every day. All that changes is our perception of the effect of the theory. We always believe that natural selection and mutations lead to different abilities and different species. But one day we may believe a change takes X amount of years, Next week we may have evidence that suggests that it takes Y amount of years. the actual theory to explain it stays the same though. KalvinB can talk to whoever wants to listen. But it common manners and courtesy to not talk to people who don't want to listen to you. Also, It's beyond rude to try and change laws to get your myth taught to children under the guise of science. If you can't shut up and stay out of my way at least have the decency to keep your myths out of our science classes.
You're saying something is rude. Based on whose laws?? What says something is rude? And still no answer to my question. Perhaps you've missed it. Here it is again: My logical question is this: if you believe in the theory of evolution which keeps changing every day, why must one listen to you??? How do we know you're "evolved" enough to make decisions??? After all, as an atheist you're just a bunch of atoms or whatever just glued together with no purpose whatsoever on this planet.
Dude, I experienced atheistic regimes in the past. The last thing they do is respect anyone's freedom except theirs. You can persist in your atheistic thinking but we all know what atheism ultimately leads to. We only need to look again at communism.
I see you are detached from even the idea of common courtesy. can't say i'm surprised. I explained above how the theory stays exactly the same and only our understanding of it's effects changes. You can know that i have evolved to make decision because i do make decision. I make lots of them every day (that was the stupidest question i have ever been asked to answer).
If you're just a bunch of atoms with no purpose whatsoever and you claim you have no idea how evolution works, doesn't it make sense that someone who claims (unlike you) to have a purpose and also to have an eternal set of rules, wouldn't you say the latter is more qualified when it comes to making decisions?
It was a pig's foot that got evolution into the classroom to begin with. The "scientists" claimed it was something it wasn't. Evolution is just as much a religion as any other religion. The problem is that evolutionists can't seperate adaptation from evolution. And they think dinosaur bones somehow contradict the Bible. Not my problem. Maybe if you'd allow other schools of thought into the school system you wouldn't be so ignorant.
OK, that maybe true that the "atheistic" regimes you've experienced in the past have not respected your freedom, but that's not what I was saying. I was talking about myself personally - you cannot tar atheists with the same brush. I'll correct you once again: Since you're too ignorant to do it yourself. Ultimately, the people who oppose Evolution and Natural selection, only do so because they have no idea what it's about and completely fail to comprehend it. It's the classic knee jerk reaction to change. ProteinDude and Kalvin, do you understand what Evolution or Natural Selection entails? If not, then you should be embarrassed that you've persisted on arguing against something you know nothing about. I have to pinch myself when theists take Creationism over Evolution.. I mean, come on! What PROOF is there for Creationism? A book? Is that it???? At least Evolution has some scientific backing. Even if you deny Evolution, you cannot deny ALL of the findings. Spare yourself some dignity and at least accept some evidence of Evolution... jeez... This is the funny thing: I know more about Evolution than you two and I know as much about Creationism as you both do too. So... who's in a more logical and rational position?
There's some evidence for Creationism as well. There is proof that a number of people in the Bible really did exist as well as the locations. So by your logic, since there is some proof, it must all be true. There is zero evidence that bridges the gaping hole between adaptation (observed on a daily basis) and evolution (never been observed, simply assumed). Adaptation proves Evolution just as much as Paul proves Creationism. You should be embarressed for not knowing where facts stop and religion begins. Religious people are well aware of where the facts (like Paul existing) stop and faith begins. Evolutionists don't have that ability. That's why they think Evolution is true and a fact. What they're really talking about is adaptation. Not evolution. Maybe you should read those science books you keep talking about. What you meant to say is that "evolution must be true because God doesn't exist." Which assumes that God doesn't exist and is just a circular argument. I have 5 PhDs and just as many playboy bunny girlfriends. Your point? Oh yes, and I look like Brad Pitt. Isn't the internet awesome? I can say anything and it must be true!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion We are listed here. Non-Adherent (Secular/Atheist/Irreligious/Agnostic/Nontheist) 1.1 billion ONE BILLION. Ah ah Politics & Sects