Why I hate religion.

[Guest]

People are entitled to their faith, and staunch atheism isn't any different from any other creed in that regard.

 

Also, it's quite, quite hypocritical to be -that- bothered by someone else's lifestyle yet claim to not care about any of it. Sounds exactly like what you hate so much, eh? Really. I don't know if you are just young or something, TC, but a valuable life lesson to learn is that you can't look at everything in such a black and white way. I know some really cool religious folks who are some of -the- nicest people I know, and I can't blame them for wanting to give themselves strength in such a way. I've never cared for it much, but shit like your attitude is the -very- reason I have such a knee-jerk reaction to atheism as a whole.

 

 

So yeah. Let people live. Fundamentalists exist of every creed, and yours is really no different than any other. And if you want to rant and rave at me about how it is? Reverse "Christianity" and "Atheism" in my post. Realize what you are doing, and realize that it doesn't matter at all who believes in what, as people are individuals.

[Grasman]

Religion is the root of all Evil.

Lack of empathy is the root of all evil

[Guest]

Lack of empathy is the root of all evil

 

 

Amen .

[Guest]

You all can accept religion if you want but I'm tired of living in an ignorant world and I will continue to speak out against it. Is it coincidental that your religion is usually based on your region ex: if you were born in old Greece you'd most likely believe in zues if you were born in Mexico today you'd most likely be catholic...I wonder why that is

[Guest]

Because religion is man-made.

 

That isn't why most people are going off on you, by the way.

[jacky67]

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.

 

You should read what einstein thought about religion , and you definitly can't say this guy wasn't trying to understand the world .

 

Science try to explain everything but there some thing you can't understand ,a tree will never manage to use some computer , a tree will never see us , well maybe we are some kind of tree for other object we are not even able to imagine .

[Guest]

I hate how people use Einstein quotes to promote religion. Einstein had nothing to do and wanted nothing to know of organized religion. He used God as a reference to greater powers beyond human understanding, or a reference to the nature and the universe as a whole. I really don't care about other people's religious believes, but the indoctrination of children bothers me a lot. Indeed, keep your penis in your pants and away from children.

[Face Kicker]

atheism makes me laugh. the concept is generally based on there being no factual evidence that there is a "god"; the whole "burden of proof" argument. to deny the POSSIBILITY of some kind of higher power or "creator" is completely flawed thinking, especially coming from people that claim to be atheists due to science.

 

personally, i'm an agnostic, but i don't push my beliefs (or lack thereof) on anyone, nor do i attempt to belittle those that do have different beliefs/faith/religion. i mean, i might joke with friends about scientology or creationism, or some of the things that i find laughable in religious texts such as the bible, but i try not to openly mock people that believe that stuff. in my opinion, the "meaning of life" is to find happiness without inhibiting the happiness of others, so as long as the religions/faiths of others doesn't affect my ability to do that, i find no need to attempt to dissuade them from it or point out why i think differently.

[Guest]

You all can accept religion if you want but I'm tired of living in an ignorant world and I will continue to speak out against it. Is it coincidental that your religion is usually based on your region ex: if you were born in old Greece you'd most likely believe in zues if you were born in Mexico today you'd most likely be catholic...I wonder why that is

You are just as bad as religious fanatics...you don't see that?

 

If you can't examine both sides of a coin and analyze it for yourself, then we can't have an intelligent conversation about the subject.

 

P.S.: Zeus lol. Greek Mythology is actually pretty sweet.

[Guest]

atheism makes me laugh. the concept is generally based on there being no factual evidence that there is a "god"; the whole "burden of proof" argument. to deny the POSSIBILITY of some kind of higher power or "creator" is completely flawed thinking, especially coming from people that claim to be atheists due to science.

 

personally, i'm an agnostic, but i don't push my beliefs (or lack thereof) on anyone, nor do i attempt to belittle those that do have different beliefs/faith/religion. i mean, i might joke with friends about scientology or creationism, or some of the things that i find laughable in religious texts such as the bible, but i try not to openly mock people that believe that stuff. in my opinion, the "meaning of life" is to find happiness without inhibiting the happiness of others, so as long as the religions/faiths of others doesn't affect my ability to do that, i find no need to attempt to dissuade them from it or point out why i think differently.

 

You pretty much pinpointed my view on things. My parents made me christian and with time my view on things evolved to the point where I considered myself atheist. I finally settled on the middle line as nothing proves god doesn't exist and nothing proves that he does exist.

 

Religion or not, closed minded people would still be the same in the long run. Also, there are a lot of religious people that don't take everything as truth in religion, but use it as a moral code. I also like to think that in thousands of years, when future humans will see our scientific facts, they will probably brag how much we were ignorants and ask themselves how we could live thinking that it was the actual truth. Maybe our scientific method will be seen as religion in the future who knows ?

[MMATycoon]

atheism makes me laugh. the concept is generally based on there being no factual evidence that there is a "god"; the whole "burden of proof" argument. to deny the POSSIBILITY of some kind of higher power or "creator" is completely flawed thinking, especially coming from people that claim to be atheists due to science.

That's certainly not why I'm an atheist, so you're certainly wrong in your assumptions from my point of view. I don't think there needs to be any proof of something for it to exist; I look at it from a stance of what is more likely.

 

I don't think the concept of a God is an impossible one but I think all indications are that there isn't one, so that's both parts of your statement. That doesn't make me agnostic - I still don't think there is one and that's the definition of being atheist.

[GripGambler]

atheism makes me laugh. the concept is generally based on there being no factual evidence that there is a "god"; the whole "burden of proof" argument. to deny the POSSIBILITY of some kind of higher power or "creator" is completely flawed thinking, especially coming from people that claim to be atheists due to science.

 

personally, i'm an agnostic, but i don't push my beliefs (or lack thereof) on anyone, nor do i attempt to belittle those that do have different beliefs/faith/religion. i mean, i might joke with friends about scientology or creationism, or some of the things that i find laughable in religious texts such as the bible, but i try not to openly mock people that believe that stuff. in my opinion, the "meaning of life" is to find happiness without inhibiting the happiness of others, so as long as the religions/faiths of others doesn't affect my ability to do that, i find no need to attempt to dissuade them from it or point out why i think differently.

 

These thoughts are ignorant to what it means to be atheist. Plenty of atheists are agnostic atheists, in that they take the position that there is no god due to a lack of any evidence of one, however they will never deny the possibility of one existing as a true atheist and scientifically minded person is never 100% sure of anything, but is always on a mission to become as close to 100% as they can. This is the vast majority of atheists, and generally those you never hear of because the extremists are too loud.

[DeadlyDirk]

I think I'm agnostic if that's the correct term. I don't think there's a God, same as Mike I just find it incredibly unlikely that there is some superior being who has total control of everything but on the same hand I wouldn't completely rule it out, many have been trying to figure it out for years, I'm not going to start thinking I suddenly have all the answers, anything is possible. All in all I just have far more reasons to not believe in a god than I do to believe in one. Personally I have no idea how we got here, but I think once we're dead then we're dead, stuck in a hole in the ground and it'll just be like having a long sleep that you're completely unaware of.

 

Whatever anyone else wants to believe though is fine by me, whatever religion or faith they want to follow, I just don't think anyone should ever force their religious opinions on anyone else, what they choose to believe is up to them.

[GripGambler]

I personally don't feel that anyone is truly agnostic without being theist or atheist. Every person that I have talked to in person who has claimed to be agnostic will actually hold the position of one or the other while claiming they can't say for certain. Generally claiming agnosticism is due to not really understanding atheism, or trying to come off as more passivist in a crowd. Holding an agnostic viewpoint does not keep you from being either theist or atheist. Atheism is simply the absence of belief in a deity. Meaning, if you don't BELIEVE a deity exists, then you are atheist. Atheism DOES NOT mean that you are vehemently opposed to a deity existing. If you claim uncertainty, which many atheists do, then you are simply an agnostic atheist. What most people don't understand about atheism is that the only thing similar from one atheist to another is that they have a lack of belief in a god(s), just as all religions have theism in common. Many atheists have different views or "beliefs" on various subjects and they should not be lumped together under one thought process.

 

I challenge everyone who claims agnosticism to truly ask yourself if you BELIEVE in a deity or not. Not whether or not you think there is a possibility one could exist, just if you actually believe that one does. If you DO believe a deity exists, then you are theist. If you lack that belief, you are atheist. The decision to be agnostic comes after the fact, labeling you either an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist.

[Guest]

I'm not a relgious person. I was raised Catholic but have since, lapsed.

 

My fiance and I live next to a church, literally, I go out in my back yard, look to the right, and there's a Methodist Church. I have about ten yards of property, and then there's a church parking lot. I have been invited over more times than I can count, and I just smile and say thank you. I don't say "You're religion is bull and you're all a bunch of weak-minded sheep who can't fathom that there is nothing after this life other than worm food. You people cause wars and death and are the root of all evil." Just like they don't come at me and say "You need to be saved, stop your partying and living together in sin without being married. You will burn in hell for all eternity."

 

I guess the point I'm trying to make is, most people aren't assholes.

[MMATycoon]

You pretty much pinpointed my view on things. My parents made me christian and with time my view on things evolved to the point where I considered myself atheist. I finally settled on the middle line as nothing proves god doesn't exist and nothing proves that he does exist.

 

Religion or not, closed minded people would still be the same in the long run. Also, there are a lot of religious people that don't take everything as truth in religion, but use it as a moral code.

Agree with all that.

 

I also like to think that in thousands of years, when future humans will see our scientific facts, they will probably brag how much we were ignorants and ask themselves how we could live thinking that it was the actual truth. Maybe our scientific method will be seen as religion in the future who knows ?

Couldn't disagree more with this. The process of science is theory > analysis > publication > critical analysis > start again based on findings so far. There isn't really an end; it evolves. Therefore no scientist would ever belittle any previous scientists' work.

 

Having said that, many fundamental laws of maths and physics have been developed in the last century that will remain true no matter what scientific developments occur, in the same way as trigonometry still applies today, despite it being developed in the 15th century.

 

Most importantly though, what science is not afraid to say is "I don't know" and that's what makes it so great, what makes it develop so fast and what means it will be at the forefront of humanity, probably until someone uses it to blow us all up.... unfortunately.

[DeadlyDirk]

I personally don't feel that anyone is truly agnostic without being theist or atheist. Every person that I have talked to in person who has claimed to be agnostic will actually hold the position of one or the other while claiming they can't say for certain. Generally claiming agnosticism is due to not really understanding atheism, or trying to come off as more passivist in a crowd. Holding an agnostic viewpoint does not keep you from being either theist or atheist. Atheism is simply the absence of belief in a deity. Meaning, if you don't BELIEVE a deity exists, then you are atheist. Atheism DOES NOT mean that you are vehemently opposed to a deity existing. If you claim uncertainty, which many atheists do, then you are simply an agnostic atheist. What most people don't understand about atheism is that the only thing similar from one atheist to another is that they have a lack of belief in a god(s), just as all religions have theism in common. Many atheists have different views or "beliefs" on various subjects and they should not be lumped together under one thought process.

 

I challenge everyone who claims agnosticism to truly ask yourself if you BELIEVE in a deity or not. Not whether or not you think there is a possibility one could exist, just if you actually believe that one does. If you DO believe a deity exists, then you are theist. If you lack that belief, you are atheist. The decision to be agnostic comes after the fact, labeling you either an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist.

 

Well I guess that makes me an agnostic atheist. I agree with you to be honest though, I'm now basing all of my knowledge on the matter on your few lines of text but if what you say is true then there probably aren't many people who are dead in the middle and equally think that the chance of their either being a deity or not being one is just as likely. I would have thought most people lean to one side.

[Face Kicker]

That's certainly not why I'm an atheist, so you're certainly wrong in your assumptions from my point of view. I don't think there needs to be any proof of something for it to exist; I look at it from a stance of what is more likely.

 

I don't think the concept of a God is an impossible one but I think all indications are that there isn't one, so that's both parts of your statement. That doesn't make me agnostic - I still don't think there is one and that's the definition of being atheist.

 

 

well, i did say "generally speaking", due to the slightly varying definitions (which admittedly branch away from the literal definition) of the concept, and due to the fact that the majority of the people that i've spoken with that claim to be athiests deny even the possibility of a higher power/creator.

 

perhaps it's been a while since i've discussed the topic though, so apologies if i've offended anyone with that post (not saying i've offended you, just covering my bases )

 

all that being said, yes i suppose most people on the "non-believer" side (myself included) would technically be agnostic atheists. and, in addition, i'd probably say that a pretty substantal portion of "believers" would technically be agnostic theists.

[jacky67]

I completly agree with you mmatycoon about some fundamental laws in math, in maths you can say "i dont know" when you can't proove something,

But then you have physics and chimie , there still some physician who think proove something and 40-50years after some others guys show they are wrong .

Then below you have biology wich is based on experience and every 10years they change their mind about everything .

[GripGambler]

I completly agree with you mmatycoon about some fundamental laws in math, in maths you can say "i dont know" when you can't proove something,

But then you have physics and chimie , there still some physician who think proove something and 40-50years after some others guys show they are wrong .

Then below you have biology wich is based on experience and every 10years they change their mind about everything .

 

 

 

Err, most of this is incorrect, but instead of pointing everything out, I will direct your attention to Darwin's finches and let you draw your own conclusion.

[Guest]

Err, most of this is incorrect, but instead of pointing everything out, I will direct your attention to Darwin's finches and let you draw your own conclusion.

 

Bitch, Darwin knew nothing about chimie.

[Guest]

Agree with all that.

 

 

Couldn't disagree more with this. The process of science is theory > analysis > publication > critical analysis > start again based on findings so far. There isn't really an end; it evolves. Therefore no scientist would ever belittle any previous scientists' work.

 

Having said that, many fundamental laws of maths and physics have been developed in the last century that will remain true no matter what scientific developments occur, in the same way as trigonometry still applies today, despite it being developed in the 15th century.

 

Most importantly though, what science is not afraid to say is "I don't know" and that's what makes it so great, what makes it develop so fast and what means it will be at the forefront of humanity, probably until someone uses it to blow us all up.... unfortunately.

 

 

 

 

That doesnt seem to be the case from what i have seen. I was taught all through school and in countless tv shows and magazines and books about the Big Bang for decades. It was argued as fact, taught as fact, and a belief that was used to counter other beliefs. Sciences never says it dont know. In this case they are more than likely wrong and are coming up with something else more than likely wrong and will have everyone swearing by it. Out with Big Bang and in with Expansion, Bubble Theory, String theory, etc. Then when those do not work they invent Dark Energy and Dark Matter not because they exist but just to get ther outcome they have predetermined. Maybe i should try that on my companies taxes. Create a Dark Expense and Anti Profits so i dont have to pay so much. However, im not sure the IRS will fall for it.

[Guest]

That doesnt seem to be the case from what i have seen. I was taught all through school and in countless tv shows and magazines and books about the Big Bang for decades. It was argued as fact, taught as fact, and a belief that was used to counter other beliefs. Sciences never says it dont know. In this case they are more than likely wrong and are coming up with something else more than likely wrong and will have everyone swearing by it. Out with Big Bang and in with Expansion, Bubble Theory, String theory, etc. Then when those do not work they invent Dark Energy and Dark Matter not because they exist but just to get ther outcome they have predetermined. Maybe i should try that on my companies taxes. Create a Dark Expense and Anti Profits so i dont have to pay so much. However, im not sure the IRS will fall for it.

 

You do know the theory of rapid expansion and the Big Bang theory is the same theory, right? "Big Bang" was a demeaning name some religious guy made up and it sort of stuck.

 

And it's not like the Bubble theory or String theory rules out Big Bang or anything.

 

Not to mention they don't pull things out of their ass.

 

EDIT: Oh, that expansion theory. Still doesn't rule out Big Bang.

[MMATycoon]

That doesnt seem to be the case from what i have seen. I was taught all through school and in countless tv shows and magazines and books about the Big Bang for decades. It was argued as fact, taught as fact, and a belief that was used to counter other beliefs. Sciences never says it dont know. In this case they are more than likely wrong and are coming up with something else more than likely wrong and will have everyone swearing by it. Out with Big Bang and in with Expansion, Bubble Theory, String theory, etc. Then when those do not work they invent Dark Energy and Dark Matter not because they exist but just to get ther outcome they have predetermined. Maybe i should try that on my companies taxes. Create a Dark Expense and Anti Profits so i dont have to pay so much. However, im not sure the IRS will fall for it.

You're confusing enthusiastic amateurs who believe in science with scientists. Scientists never say they are 100% right unless it's been irrefutably proven. That's why is "The Big Bang THEORY" and not theorem. Their entire world is based on saying "I don't know", then trying to figure it out.

 

The very thing you seem to be mocking (the development and evolution of a theory through time) is the very reason science works so well and the reason we've been able to forge some sort of understanding of incredibly complex things like quantum physics or the theory of spacetime. You can't just pluck the complete right answer out of thin air without thinking about the basic concepts first.

[Guest]

You do know the theory of rapid expansion and the Big Bang theory is the same theory, right? "Big Bang" was a demeaning name some religious guy made up and it sort of stuck.

 

And it's not like the Bubble theory or String theory rules out Big Bang or anything.

 

Not to mention they don't pull things out of their ass.

 

EDIT: Oh, that expansion theory. Still doesn't rule out Big Bang.

 

 

It was first believed the universe started from a an explosion. Now they claim it expanded into existence because the temp of the universe isn't the same and doesn't suggest an explosion. Also I didn't say it did rule out the BB theory. Only that Science is always getting stuff wrong and people are so desperate to counter religion that they forget that all of it is just theory.