Proof of the Existence of God

[BayBuck]

Compared to when?

Eden, probably.

 

[buckeyegrad]

I agree to a certain extent but religion has been given a free pass for too long. It seems that every other controversial topic is open to discussion - politics, sex, war, money, etc. - but as soon as religion is brought up there is a sense that it is off limits because we don't want to offend anyone. Too bad, you don't have a right to not be offended in this country. Religion and faith are important topics because they determine actions. I'm not claiming that all of those actions are bad or harmful to society, but as we see more frequently on the news many horrendous actions are the result of religious beliefs (yes, I'm referring more to Islam than Christianity but they are both based on the same irrational belief system). It's time that "freethinkers" stand up and let themselves be known and not sit back quietly while irrational and unsubstantiated beliefs are given a free pass.

I'm not advocating that atheists go door-to-door trying to convert people, but I believe that we are seeing a very positive trend in more people (especially young people) becoming atheist and non-religious. I think this is partly because atheism is much more socially acceptable now as the internet becomes more available to people around the world and more public figures become outspoken about their atheism. Our world has a lot of very real problems that won't be fixed by praying, waiting for the Rapture to come and not criticizing religious people who hold harmful beliefs.

Well, at least I now know what Brewtus looks like.

 

[Mike80]

Compared to when?

I didn't mean it as a comparison, I meant it as a follow on to Jwins observation about how every conversation that goes into certain subjects becomes a trainwreck, I just didn't phrase it right.

There is a lack of respect amongst competing ideologies - the religion/no-religion topic is just one of many, but it's one of the most nasty in my IMO. You have two sides that basically try to tell the other they are superior than the other in ever facet, there isn't a right answer on either side that we will know in our lifetimes, but that doesn't stop stupid people from taking the arguments too far.

And what's worse, this type of mentality is showing up throughout our society on every level - sports, politics, sex, race, education, weather, taxes, monetary discipline - you name it, it's out there.

 

[Mike80]

For someone so intellectually superior, he looks miserable.

 

[buckeyegrad]

Two, I like how this superior being is riding the bus. Nothing against public transportation, but it doesn't scream superior to me at all.

Please, only Neanderthals choose to burn fossil fuels indiscriminately. The superiors are the ones who worry about their carbon footprint and select public transportation (unless you are an ultra-superior like Al Gore).

 

[Mike80]

Woah woah woah there buddy, when did we start talking about race? Back away from that topic before somebody's feelings get really hurt! :tongue2:

Everyone can talk about race, just not White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestants




Is the sarcasm font really necessary here?

 

[buckeyegrad]

For someone so intellectually superior, he looks miserable.

Wouldn't you be miserable if everyone around you was inferior and you couldn't find an equal?

 

[Mike80]

Please, only Neanderthals choose to burn fossil fuels indiscriminately. The superiors are the ones who worry about their carbon footprint and select public transportation (unless you are an ultra-superior like Al Gore).

He also created the interwebz!!!!

 

[Mike80]

Wouldn't you be miserable if everyone around you was inferior and you couldn't find an equal?

I don't know - I think he wants a cheeseburger...he looks hungry

 

[Brewtus]

It's interesting that the human animal is arrogant enough to think their belief system or lack of belief system (as you will) is the "right" approach while disdaining everyone else's belief system as "irrational".

And we wonder why society is breaking down at the most basic levels....

I think the bigger picture is: should one seek to know what is true in the universe and if so, how do we best determine what is true? I would bet that we both use the same methodology (logic, reason, evidence, observation, personal experience, etc.) to determine what we believe to be true about most things in our daily lives except when it comes to religious claims. Why is this methodology acceptable in some circumstances but not others? And it's not a "belief system" specifically that I called irrational, but belief in something without evidence and being inconsistent with ones methodology to determine what is true and what isn't.

 

[Mike80]

I think the bigger picture is: should one seek to know what is true in the universe and if so, how do we best determine what is true? I would bet that we both use the same methodology (logic, reason, evidence, observation, personal experience, etc.) to determine what we believe to be true about most things in our daily lives except when it comes to religious claims. Why is this methodology acceptable in some circumstances but not others? And it's not a "belief system" specifically that I called irrational, but belief in something without evidence and being inconsistent with ones methodology to determine what is true and what isn't.

So because you don't have any evidence means you don't believe what others think is evidence of their own belief system?

And yes, you basically called all religious belief systems irrational.

 

[Brewtus]

So because you don't have any evidence means you don't believe what others think is evidence of their own belief system?

And yes, you basically called all religious belief systems irrational.

I can't comment specifically on what others believe until they state exactly what they believe and why. But just about every theist I've encountered has admitted that their belief system comes down to "faith" which is essentially belief without evidence which is irrational.

 

[Muck]

And what's worse, this type of mentality is showing up throughout our society on every level - sports, politics, sex, race, education, weather, taxes, monetary discipline - you name it, it's out there.

Sure, but my point was to question how that is different than any other time in human history. The Crusades, Inquisition, Thirty Year's War, persecution of Judaism (and that just covers a few hundred years in one small corner of the world)...we've always been a species prone to battling over beliefs as strongly as over territory or food.

 

[BayBuck]

I can't comment specifically on what others believe until they state exactly what they believe and why. But just about every theist I've encountered has admitted that their belief system comes down to "faith" which is essentially belief without evidence which is irrational.

I think you hold too narrow a view of rationality, but even if we accept that view at some point even a rigid Cartesian rationalist is going to subject some element of his own belief-structure to some form of the faith-leap. Anyone with any psychedelic experience can tell you that our physical senses are a very unreliable foundation upon which to build our understanding of reality. It's really not as hard as you suggest to understand faith and reason as complementary or at least not in direct conflict, and in fact it's a part of Catholic Church doctrine for example.

 

[jwinslow]

Eh? Are there not constitutional reasons why Atheists' opinions on these matters are to be respected/not offended? I mean, to the extent that we might define "religion" loosely as a set of beliefs/values based on how we interpret the world - don't atheists have as equal a right to talk about it if they want?

I am no huge fan of door to door salesmen for Christ. I certainly wouldn't be a fan of a door to door salesman for Atheism either. But... here on the internet, the discussion seems to me quite appropriate.

That was worded poorly. I wasn't arguing that the constitution shielded one side or prevented the discussion, merely that it naturally causes people to tread lightly around someone's religion while shouting down their sexual or political stances.

I agree that an open discussion is healthy. I disagree that humanity has changed or that religion is unique in its toxic, emotional nature where offenses (potential or predisposed) often inhibit the conversation.