I’m going to start by saying that I am an atheist. That, in the most simple way I can explain, means I lack a belief in a god or gods. That’s all it means, and I’ve realized this over time. I have no issues with the god I don’t believe in, I’m not angry with god. It seems so many people are, though. Being an atheist, I checked the appropriate box when starting my Stumble account. Most of the atheist literature I come across seems to be just a lot of anger directed towards theists, Christians in particular, trying to prove them wrong in their beliefs. Why?
I can think of a couple reasons, using my own personal experience and what I’ve learned in life so far. I grew up in a Christian family, Catholic to be exact, although we didn’t practice. When I was about fourteen I started to question my faith, and came to realize I didn’t believe in god. This was aided by the theory of evolution and many other scientific discoveries. I thought people who believed in god were stupid and didn’t see the evidence that was right in front of them. It pissed me off that all my life I had been getting this bullshit slammed down my throat. Religions in this country have a lot of power, and many religious people say that being an atheist equals moral bankruptcy, which is just ridiculous. To say a person is corrupt based on religious views alone is discriminatory and ignorant.
Religion has power in the United States. In certain states atheists are restricted from holding office. Even though this is a blatant disregard of the Constitution, a violation of separation of church and state, it’s still allowed. Words about god are in our pledge, on our money, which wasn’t always how it was, so I don’t want to hear any ‘oh it’s just tradition’ crap.
So there’s a couple reasons some atheists may be pissed. Fine, But isn’t it enough? I grew tired of being an angry atheist, trying to tell people what to believe or not to believe in a long time ago. There’s no point, unless it’s a welcome debate or discussion. I get pissed when people try to push their beliefs on me, so why would I want to push my lack of beliefs on someone? What good does it accomplish?
Can’t we all just respect one another, and accept each other regardless of what our feelings on religion are? In the end, we’re all just people trying to live life and find something that works for us. I’m tired of fighting and arguing with people. I’m not saying we should roll over and allow our government to continue to dissolve the seperation of church and state, that’s vital and necessary to protect the rights of all people of all religions and should be respected. I just don’t want to hate people based on them believing and worshipping in a god I don’t believe in, there’s enough people fighting that useless battle without me.
I agree completely, im an atheist, my father is evangelical Christian. He respects my beliefs as an atheist, i respect his as a Christian. We dont talk about religion. However, i do like to read up on atheist websites, because if i say im an atheist within a ten mile radius of a Christian, they feel the need to attack me and my beliefs. Mabye its where i live, but i use atheist websites for self defense of sorts. If they cant respect my beliefs, i can sure as hell smack down theirs.
The whole idea isn't that we don't respect their beliefs. Why do beliefs need respect? Could you truly respect someone who believes in an invisible sky wizard? I know I couldn't I certainly pretend I do at times but thats mostly just to get them to leave me alone or to avoid conflict that I honestly don't care to have. If someone brings up their imaginary sky wizard pal in a conversation I mostly just nod and wait for them to go away. So long as the conversation wasn't intended to be a debate. How ever when people bring their imaginary sky friends into places they don't belong, IE the constitution and social niceties I might of given them are out the window. Your religion is wrong and keep your damn sky wizard out of the constitution. There is nothing to bless America and as such we have a social and economical responsibility to do our best to ensure that this world wont be a shit hole for our kids. Part of the problem is people not realizing that it's their responsibility to ensure the world doesn't blow up because there isn't some sky wizard to take you to his sky castle in the clouds when you die.
If religious belief did not effect government or society, perhaps I could look the other way. If ignorant parents didn't let their innocent children die waiting for some magical intervention, perhaps I would think religion was harmless. If time and again I did not have to witness the way religion creates "us and them" scenarios and intensify prejudice maybe I would see more of the supposed good that it is supposed to do. And lastly, if it did not fly in the face of all reason and try to invade our schools with it's ignorance, maybe I could say live and let live. The fact is that religion is harmful, ignorant, and dangerous. That is a very bad combination to promote a loving, harmonious planet. So my conclusion is that we would all be better off if religious people could burst their bubbles of delusion and see the beautiful light of reason. Unfortunately I realize how deeply rooted these ignorant belief systems are and how they prey on the weak and fearful. Sadly it is going to be a long time before we can be free of religious idiocy.
I was trying to have a discussion with you a while back about religion but as soon as I began to question your position you turned into the intellectual equivelant of a 10-year-old and decided to attack me instead. As soon as you get off point and start calling names you hurt your position with anyone who knows better (such as myself). Further, you feed into the stereotype of most people have of atheists. Religious individuals will look at you and think that you turn into a total fucking retard without accepting a belief system on faith. If our conversation form before continued, you would have found that we actually agree on many things. I would fall under the category of agnostic. I cannot say definitively that there is not a God and every attempt I have made to understand God and religion has ended up with accepting it on faith. I have tried to define God ostensively by looking at existence and life, however even though it seems statistically improbable that life as we know it exists by chance, I cannot perceive a causal link to God - there is only acceptance by faith. Epistemologically faith is not a proper method of knowledge, it should be a temporary state of uncertainty that will be resolved when more facts are known. A belief system based on faith is ultimately arbitrary. No matter how true or false the conclusions of a faith-based belief system are, they cannot be proven or understood objectively. Take for instance stealing. Many individuals would agree that it is wrong because of religious and/or faith-based moral reasons. However while the conclusion is true the individual in question doesn't know it. Before he can fully understand stealing, he must first base his ethics in perceptual reality. Ethics is a code of values accepted by choice that guide man’s choices and actions. Life is the fundamental value and a requirement for all other values. Stated generally, all things that lead to life are good and all things that lead to death are evil. Since life and death are well-understood and observable, they are solid concepts to use as an ethical foundation and make arbitrary value-judgments impossible. Any healthy, thinking individual regardless of his or her religious beliefs, upbringing, or social disposition may determine what is good or evil by practicing rationality. Therefore to understand why stealing is evil, one must understand it’s relationship to life. Survival is the action that supports life. Like all actions, survival is a choice that man must make in order to sustain his own life. Time is the price paid for survival. To obtain food and water man must spend time performing activities (such as hunting) to obtain fuel for his body. Savings enables us to keep a stock of unconsumed goods which can buy time, which is the price paid for survival, which is the action that supports life. Therefore, to take unearned property (savings) is immoral because it disrupts the process necessary to support an individual’s life. If I don't understand the concept of stealing objectively then I leave myself open to accept "moral" justifications for stealing (Socialism, Robin Hood as a hero, or even capital gains taxes).