A few questions for fellow atheists

[Archaic]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
That's appalingly ignorant of you. Most Christians I know don't have an "us vs. them" mentality that you seem to revel in. Who is "they"? Christians, or just the extremists that make you mad?

I don't have an "us vs. them" mentality. It was the simplest way to state my point. "Us" in this case generally refers to other Athiests, though depending on the conditions of the situation, that's not always the case. As for "they", it's anyone who fulfills those conditions, religious or not. (ie. In general, that goes for you too Communists)

Originally posted by cyclotron7
Please. If you have issues with fundies, that's fine, but most Christians would reject the idea that they are "attacking you" or forcing beliefs on you. That's just pathetic.

And most Christians wouldn't realise that's exactly what they're doing with school prayer, religious education in schools (N.B. The ones that teach only a specific religion as opposed to ones teaching about all religious without bias. It's unfortunate that the former outnumbers the latter), and other such things like inserting "under god" into the US Pledge of Allegiance.

Frankly, I could further expand that and say that many Church Sermons (You know, the ones where they say that us people who don't believe in their [particular] invisible man in the sky go to hell) are attacks on "us" (ie. us people who don't believe in their [particular] invisible man in the sky. But would most people realise that fact?

Originally posted by cyclotron7
Sometimes I just need to tell a bigot that they're a bigot. In this case, it's you.

I hardly think that just because I criticize you with logical arguements with actual evidence that I'm a bigot.

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by Frogman


That seems a bit harsh to me. I think a single creator is possible and rational in the face of the wonders of creation that we see. Add that to the anecdotal experiences since the dawn of history and God seems very possible if not likely in some fashion. I suppose then GePap that you are a true atheist and believe there is just not a God of any sort period. To me its not rational to be so sure threre isn't a God when you have to admit that there is much to the universe that we don't know and there are places in the universe where our understanding of physical laws is lacking (black holes).

Everything has a cause and effect. That is a rule.

You still use fantasy and speculation to convince yourself a god must exist.

You have no real data to prove that your god is real.

But science also cannot provide a solid answer on how the universe began.
Although, science can give a better account to me than just accepting a myth.

You can have your myths, I want more than mere blind accpetance.

[Elok]

There are a lot of problems with your assertion. First and foremost, you are assuming that these claims of miracles are genuine. In other words you are presuming that all possible natural causes, including frauds and false assertions, have been excluded. Now if you can kindly show me this is the case.

The three I cited I chose simply because I have seen photographs of all three. Photographs can be faked, but I seriously doubt that a bunch of monks sat down with photoshop to impress some people they never met. Most of the accounts of miracles I have heard are secondhand, though still not very easy to discredit; I chose those three to mention because I know they occured. I thought about adding the icon of Our Lady of Cicero to the list, but every atheist I've talked to has insisted there is some kind of oil-secretion device embedded in the solid, treated wood, so I left it off, though it too has irrefutably happened. The incorrupt bodies(of which there are many) and the church are ongoing incidents you could check out if you needed to.

I'm thinking you are the type of person who picks up the newspaper every day, sees the wars going on, sees the murders in the streets, the drug addicts and the child molesters and thinks that must be some standard of humanity. Do you know what the size of each newspaper would be if all the GOOD things were published every day? Every couple going on their first date? Every new child born to a happy mother? Every kid going to his first soccer game? Even in the most miserable third-world slum you will find happiness abound, and it is even more surprising since there would seem that these people should have nothing to be happy about.

I'm talking about more everyday things than that. I'm talking about the lies we all tell when we know deep inside we'll be caught. I'm talking about the way we gossip and chuckle at each others' misfortunes. I'm talking about the way you insist on telling me how stupid I am, and I feel obligated to tell you how stupid you are, even though our bickering does neither one of us any good. I'm talking about the way you've read this far and are now shaking your head at this ignorant neurotic bastard of a Christian who obviously isn't as clever and wondrous a man as you. I'm talking about the way we endorse capitalism as the best even when it's the least of many evils. I'm talking about how we all know our clothes are made in sweatshops and we don't really care. I'm talking about how even our peace protesters turn violent and riot. I'm talking about how a woman can kill her own offspring and call it progress. I'm talking about a nation gathered around its TV sets watching people cheat and hurt each other, laughing, and calling it "reality." I'm talking about the fact that people actually volunteer to go on such shows. I'm talking about the commercials we see promising NO PAYMENTS UNTIL 2005 COME ON AND WORK YOURSELF INTO FINANCIAL RUIN! I'm talking about working all our lives to make some damned mortgage payment this month or that, saving up cash to buy a new big-screen and indebt ourselves further, watching TV raise our kids without us, growing fat and unhealthy from bad diets, watching the bombs hit Baghdad with a vague sense of July-fourth entertainment, and ending it all in a nursing home, stuck full of tubes and ignored. There is "happiness" everywhere because people are very good at adapting to their worries. We've been this way since the dawn of time so we have little better to look at for comparison. I don't believe we should have to and I don't care if I have to believe a lie to solve the problem. I don't think it is a lie. If you're happy being unhappy that's your business. I started posting here not to convince you(I could almost tell from the beginning, and indeed my past experience agrees, that you will never believe in anything you can't see in front of your face), but to defend my beliefs. It turned into an attack because, like I said, we're all crazy. I suppose I'd better stop before I work myself into a heart attack.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Elok
I'm talking about more everyday things than that. I'm talking about the lies we all tell when we know deep inside we'll be caught.

Even the most stupid things have a twisted logic behind them. If you tell a lie when you think you will be caught is because the short-term benefit of telling that lie apparenlty is more than the cost of being caught.

I'm talking about the way we gossip and chuckle at each others' misfortunes.

And I suppose this never happened before?

I'm talking about the way you insist on telling me how stupid I am, and I feel obligated to tell you how stupid you are, even though our bickering does neither one of us any good. I'm talking about the way you've read this far and are now shaking your head at this ignorant neurotic bastard of a Christian who obviously isn't as clever and wondrous a man as you.

It doesn't? Then why are we still here? I like to argue and apparently you do too so there's our benefit. I would hardly call this discussion something evil as you claim. If everyone shut up and kept their opinions to theirselves that would be the uttmost of ignorance. I'd rather be labeled evil than ignorant. And I don't think you are stupid, you have argued much better than most christians I know.

I'm talking about the way we endorse capitalism as the best even when it's the least of many evils.

You just said it, the least of many evils so therefore there is no better alternative at this moment. Care to think up an alternative instead of just whining about it?

I'm talking about how we all know our clothes are made in sweatshops and we don't really care.

Ever thought that withouht those sweatshops, those people would be unemployed? It's not an issue of evil, it is an issue of economics which by nature is neither good nor evil.

I'm talking about how even our peace protesters turn violent and riot. I'm talking about how a woman can kill her own offspring and call it progress.

I know people who have had abortions and are the most humane, caring and kind people you will ever get to know. To brand these people into the "evil" category is extremely narrow-minded on your part. I cannot imagine how religions like the catholic which in theory prohibit birth control call it progress either. In my country there are women who have 10 children or more just because their religion tells them that protected sex goes against the wishes of god. Now they have brought 10 children into poverty and undernourishment. You call that progress?

I'm talking about a nation gathered around its TV sets watching people cheat and hurt each other, laughing, and calling it "reality."I'm talking about the fact that people actually volunteer to go on such shows.

Part of education is knowing what is real and what is not. I can watch all sorts of things on TV and realize that reality is not like that. TV is for entertainment, nothing else. If you don't like the show, change the channel or turn it off.

I'm talking about the commercials we see promising NO PAYMENTS UNTIL 2005 COME ON AND WORK YOURSELF INTO FINANCIAL RUIN!

No better than some tele-evangelists...

I'm talking about working all our lives to make some damned mortgage payment this month or that, saving up cash to buy a new big-screen and indebt ourselves further, watching TV raise our kids without us, growing fat and unhealthy from bad diets, watching the bombs hit Baghdad with a vague sense of July-fourth entertainment, and ending it all in a nursing home, stuck full of tubes and ignored.

And before the "fall" was this different? You actually believe Adam and Eve lived in some earthly paradise? You actually think our ancestors had it any easier? You honestly believe people in the medieval ages didn't work all their lives for something even more meager than a big-screen TV? And if you end up in a nursery home think for a minute that you lived a life more than twice as long and productive as someone 500 years ago or less, which much less worries and much less hardship.

So now eating bad is "evil" too? Just because there are things that are wrong you brand all of this into the "evil category?" So if I go out and party and don't study for a test and fail it I must be the most evilest of people. I think your definition of "evil" is a bit screwed.

BTW. Speak for your country when you say everyone watched Baghdad burning as entertainment. Most people in mine were horrified at it.

There is "happiness" everywhere because people are very good at adapting to their worries. We've been this way since the dawn of time so we have little better to look at for comparison. I don't believe we should have to and I don't care if I have to believe a lie to solve the problem. I don't think it is a lie.

So you are saying that religion by itself suddenly turns people into good and noble human beings? pleeeease. There is no animal in the world which can feel the same joy as we can, the other extreme is that they probably never be as miserable. It's a trade-off as I said previously. Think of it, we are not so much different. They live just to survive, the care for their own kind, they kill others (and sometimes their kind too). They may not be as great backstabbers and cheats like us humans, then again they are also nowhere as charitious and benevolent as we can be either.

If you're happy being unhappy that's your business. I started posting here not to convince you(I could almost tell from the beginning, and indeed my past experience agrees, that you will never believe in anything you can't see in front of your face), but to defend my beliefs. It turned into an attack because, like I said, we're all crazy. I suppose I'd better stop before I work myself into a heart attack.

You are right, I am not naive enough to believe something like religion, something that wouldn've even exist if it weren't passed on from generation to generation and people believe if not for any greater reason than anything they tell you as a child you end up believing. Being a sceptic isn't just saying "no" to everything your eyes don't see. It's simply giving no reason to believe it without evidence. Believing in god is no greater than believing in aliens or the Loch Ness monster. Sure, there are tidbits of supposed "proof" that they exist, but nothing concrete. I repeat the question I asked in my previous post which you did not answer: if god truly exists why has he not manifested himself in a more convincing way?

Again, I have a feeling you are not realizing that this world might be just a little better than you (or your religion?) have made yourself believe.

[Elok]

Even the most stupid things have a twisted logic behind them. If you tell a lie when you think you will be caught is because the short-term benefit of telling that lie apparenlty is more than the cost of being caught.

Apparently. But it's never proved true in the long run for me.

And I suppose this never happened before?

This is not a rant against modern man. This is a rant against the crazy notions of all mankind, which has been prevalent forever so far as history tells me.

It doesn't? Then why are we still here? I like to argue and apparently you do too so there's our benefit. I would hardly call this discussion something evil as you claim. If everyone shut up and kept their opinions to theirselves that would be the uttmost of ignorance. I'd rather be labeled evil than ignorant. And I don't think you are stupid, you have argued much better than most christians I know.

I use evil, crazy, and stupid almost interchangeably, because rarely do I anything wrong that is wisely done, nor anything truly foolish that does good. It has to do with how I regard our world. Our whole discussion is not evil as such, but each of us on this board has stooped to personal attacks at one point to try and win an argument with someone we don't even know. The promotion of bad feeling and resentment for no reason is not a good thing.

You just said it, the least of many evils so therefore there is no better alternative at this moment. Care to think up an alternative instead of just whining about it?

It is the best of possible evils because of our nature. Socialism would probably work beautifully if it weren't for the fact that we're all lazy SOBs. Wouldn't need government at all if we weren't inclined to start trouble with each other.

Ever thought that withouht those sweatshops, those people would be unemployed? It's not an issue of evil, it is an issue of economics which by nature is neither good nor evil.

Do you know what goes on in a sweatshop? It's half a step shy of slavery. People are overworked, intimidated and browbeaten into staying late for overtime every day. They hire seventeen-year-old girls(chosen for their relative docility and quick fingers), pay them pennies, work them overhard for years, and fire them when their nerves are shot and they're used up. The workers are fed contraceptives, and should they become pregnant somehow anyway, they are given the choice of an abortion or the boot. Sweatshops are nothing resembling gainful employment; they ruin a whole generation of young people so overseas corporations are free to spend more cash on advertising.

I know people who have had abortions and are the most humane, caring and kind people you will ever get to know. To brand these people into the "evil" category is extremely narrow-minded on your part. I cannot imagine how religions like the catholic which in theory prohibit birth control call it progress either. In my country there are women who have 10 children or more just because their religion tells them that protected sex goes against the wishes of god. Now they have brought 10 children into poverty and undernourishment. You call that progress?

I do not oppose condoms, diaphraghms, the pill, or anything else of that kind. I oppose getting rid of what would, as a matter of biological certainty, otherwise become a baby, because one or both of its parents screwed up. Like you said, people find happiness everywhere. Poverty at least gives a slim chance at life. And I do not call anyone evil, only their actions, which are in my opinion not the behavior of rational beings.

Part of education is knowing what is real and what is not. I can watch all sorts of things on TV and realize that reality is not like that. TV is for entertainment, nothing else. If you don't like the show, change the channel or turn it off.

That was not an argument for censorship. I just think that something is wrong with you if you delight in the misfortune of others to no real benefit for yourself. Note that here I use the word "you" in the hypothetical sense; I don't accuse you of liking or disliking such shows.

No better than some tele-evangelists...

Agreed. Like I said, we are all crazy. Nothing is really safe from corruption. All a religious person can do is try to spread (real) truth where it will be taken, and all anyone can do is try to determine truth and lies. That said, we should probably just terminate this stupid discussion, but, well, we're crazy too.

And before the "fall" was this different? You actually believe Adam and Eve lived in some earthly paradise? You actually think our ancestors had it any easier? You honestly believe people in the medieval ages didn't work all their lives for something even more meager than a big-screen TV? And if you end up in a nursery home think for a minute that you lived a life more than twice as long and productive as someone 500 years ago or less, which much less worries and much less hardship.

I don't know what to believe about Adam and Eve. Like I said, modern man is no worse than ancient man. It's just that morally we are no better, yet we're dumb enough to think knowing about quantum physics and such makes us a breed apart in every way.

So now eating bad is "evil" too? Just because there are things that are wrong you brand all of this into the "evil category?" So if I go out and party and don't study for a test and fail it I must be the most evilest of people. I think your definition of "evil" is a bit screwed.

Eating itself is fine. Shoving Big Macs down your fat throat until your aorta looks like a clogged drain from cross-section(which many Americans do; I can't speak for the peculiar vices of your country, having never been there) is self-destructive and just plain wrong. Like I said, I call actions evil, not people. If you go boozing when you should be studying, you're looking for trouble and will almost certainly find it, but I'm in no place to say you're going to hell. Have I ever told you such a thing?

BTW. Speak for your country when you say everyone watched Baghdad burning as entertainment. Most people in mine were horrified at it.

Actually, I got a little carried away there. I was thinking of a certain person I know off the web who watches the news broadcasts like a movie, and it wound up shoving its way into the discussion.

So you are saying that religion by itself suddenly turns people into good and noble human beings? pleeeease. There is no animal in the world which can feel the same joy as we can, the other extreme is that they probably never be as miserable. It's a trade-off as I said previously. Think of it, we are not so much different. They live just to survive, the care for their own kind, they kill others (and sometimes their kind too). They may not be as great backstabbers and cheats like us humans, then again they are also nowhere as charitious and benevolent as we can be either.

No, religion can be perverted like anything else. I'm just saying that at least religious people, in theory at least, try to be good. And other animals have no need for charity. Most animals destroy only so far as they stand to gain from it, which is not good but about all you can expect from something with the brains of a dog. Only our close relatives, the chimps, murder and swindle for spite like we do. And chimps are some vicious frigging animals. Many other animals(think meerkats and various other herd animals) live in relative harmony, killing in self-defense and fighting amongst themselves only for mating and eating privileges. If a goose in a flock is wounded, other geese will drop back to help it on its way, and many pack animals act as nurses to orphans of their kind. Our altruism is nothing special in the animal kingdom.

You are right, I am not naive enough to believe something like religion, something that wouldn've even exist if it weren't passed on from generation to generation and people believe if not for any greater reason than anything they tell you as a child you end up believing. Being a sceptic isn't just saying "no" to everything your eyes don't see. It's simply giving no reason to believe it without evidence. Believing in god is no greater than believing in aliens or the Loch Ness monster. Sure, there are tidbits of supposed "proof" that they exist, but nothing concrete.

Heh. Tomato, tomahto. Touche, I guess.

I repeat the question I asked in my previous post which you did not answer: if god truly exists why has he not manifested himself in a more convincing way?

According to records, He already tried it, about two thousand years ago. He performed several miracles but wound up dying rather slowly and painfully anyway. I know you don't believe it even happened the first time, but supposing it did, do you actually insist he do it again for you to see it?

Again, I have a feeling you are not realizing that this world might be just a little better than you (or your religion?) have made yourself believe.

Well, I think similarly of you, I assure you. From this fact we may deduce that we are a pair of arrogant ******.

[Archaic]

Originally posted by Elok
Socialism would probably work beautifully if it weren't for the fact that we're all lazy SOBs.

Which brand of Socialism exactly? Most wouldn't work. The fact remains though that the dynamics of the market actually allows the markets to better satisfy social goals under optimum conditions (ie. We need less government intervention and protectionism for that to happen) than any Socialist system.

Originally posted by Elok
Do you know what goes on in a sweatshop? It's half a step shy of slavery. People are overworked, intimidated and browbeaten into staying late for overtime every day. They hire seventeen-year-old girls(chosen for their relative docility and quick fingers), pay them pennies, work them overhard for years, and fire them when their nerves are shot and they're used up. The workers are fed contraceptives, and should they become pregnant somehow anyway, they are given the choice of an abortion or the boot. Sweatshops are nothing resembling gainful employment; they ruin a whole generation of young people so overseas corporations are free to spend more cash on advertising.

Fallacious Appeal to Emotion. You didn't address his point that while the conditions are not something that we would accept in a developed western society, that they're still better than the conditions they would've been in without the sweatshop. As a matter of economics, they are given a fair wage given the conditions. (ie. Many people who want to work, only so many jobs to go down, of course the equilibrium wage is going to be significantly lower. One could draw many parallels with the European Industrial Revolution.) Though one would admit that they really should treat their workers better (One wonders just what would happen if they improved working conditions slightly and applied the concept of efficiency wages), that is beside the point of the central arguement.

Originally posted by Elok
I do not oppose condoms, diaphraghms, the pill, or anything else of that kind. I oppose getting rid of what would, as a matter of biological certainty, otherwise become a baby, because one or both of its parents screwed up. Like you said, people find happiness everywhere. Poverty at least gives a slim chance at life. And I do not call anyone evil, only their actions, which are in my opinion not the behavior of rational beings.

If you cannot realistically support the child, why would you go through to term when Abortions aren't that expensive, and the trauma and financial expense of bearing to term than giving up for adoption is too high, how is that not the action of a rational being. If you simply don't want a child, but had sex because it felt good, isn't the logical and rational decision to abort it? Your opinion of what is rational or not seems to be based around emotional principles, and appeals to emotion are a logical fallacy.

Originally posted by Elok
According to records, He already tried it, about two thousand years ago. He performed several miracles but wound up dying rather slowly and painfully anyway. I know you don't believe it even happened the first time, but supposing it did, do you actually insist he do it again for you to see it?

The only record being a book of myths which has been frequently revised and mistranslated over the past 2000 years, and which contradicts many records of the period. For example...

Matthew 2:16
Herod kills all boys in and around Bethlehem that are two years old and under. Such a massacre would certainly have been noted by contemporary historians. Yet not even Josephus, who documented Herod's life in detail, mentioned this event.

John 1:28
"These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." But no such site is known in history. Some translations (ASV, NAB, NIV, RSV, NRSV) rename Bethabara as Bethany, but Bethany is a suburb of Jerusalem and, therefore, not "beyond the Jordan."

[DaShi]

Believe in the CBeast!

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Elok
Apparently. But it's never proved true in the long run for me.

Because you had incomplete information. If you KNEW that a lie would be caught you wouldn't tell it. You tell it because you cling to the hope that it will not escape and therefore with that reasoning provides you with a benefit greater than that of not telling it. You may be wrong of course but it's no different than taking a "wise" business descision only to find out later it wasn't so wise.

This is not a rant against modern man. This is a rant against the crazy notions of all mankind, which has been prevalent forever so far as history tells me.

I a previous post you mentioned this was not the case "before the fall". If this has happened throughout all of history then perhaps it is human nature, or animal nature, so why are we to blame? Not everyone can be perfect.

I use evil, crazy, and stupid almost interchangeably,

Those are three VERY different words.

because rarely do I anything wrong that is wisely done, nor anything truly foolish that does good. It has to do with how I regard our world. Our whole discussion is not evil as such, but each of us on this board has stooped to personal attacks at one point to try and win an argument with someone we don't even know. The promotion of bad feeling and resentment for no reason is not a good thing.

I love to argue about anything, and I don't carry any bad feeling against the people who do not share my opinions. Wouldn't this world be boring if we didn't have anyone to argue with? Anyway, we are acheiving a certain pleasure out of it because if not we would've jumped to another thread looong ago.

It is the best of possible evils because of our nature. Socialism would probably work beautifully if it weren't for the fact that we're all lazy SOBs. Wouldn't need government at all if we weren't inclined to start trouble with each other.

I don't think it doesn't work because we are lazy but rather power-hungry. Socialism inherently creates a powerful elite alienated from the struggles of the working class. And government is necessary

Do you know what goes on in a sweatshop? It's half a step shy of slavery. People are overworked, intimidated and browbeaten into staying late for overtime every day. They hire seventeen-year-old girls(chosen for their relative docility and quick fingers), pay them pennies, work them overhard for years, and fire them when their nerves are shot and they're used up. The workers are fed contraceptives, and should they become pregnant somehow anyway, they are given the choice of an abortion or the boot. Sweatshops are nothing resembling gainful employment; they ruin a whole generation of young people so overseas corporations are free to spend more cash on advertising.

I totally agree that sweatshops are terrible and inhumane, and represent the most horrid aspect of laisez-faire globalization. However, from my country's perspective, which is sweatshop-central, the entire border economy would collapse if it weren't for this. There are hundreds of thousands employed who would end up in the streets or in the crime business if those sweatshops left. It's not so easy to just say they should dissapear and it's easy to ***** about it from a nice suburban home but you need to understand the perspective of those people before you pass judgement.

A while ago the World Bank (I think) started a campaign to end child labour in Pakistan. They convinced the government to make it mandatory for all soccer balls to have a seal which said that no child labour was employed. Do you know what happened? Most of the child labour was employed in small familiy-driven establishments. This program only ended up breaking these small business and bringing the profits to the big soccer ball manufacturers who had the means to survive without child labour. So, in the long run was this so humane? Many popular decisions sound reasonable but once they are applied they end up failing miserably because people are too PC to see reality in a less black-and-white manner. Even the WB admitted this program was a failure.

That was not an argument for censorship. I just think that something is wrong with you if you delight in the misfortune of others to no real benefit for yourself. Note that here I use the word "you" in the hypothetical sense; I don't accuse you of liking or disliking such shows.

I don't know what to believe about Adam and Eve. Like I said, modern man is no worse than ancient man. It's just that morally we are no better, yet we're dumb enough to think knowing about quantum physics and such makes us a breed apart in every way.

not a new breed but the tools of knowledge help us tremendously in understanding how the world works and slowly shed any doubts about unexplained phenomena.

Eating itself is fine. Shoving Big Macs down your fat throat until your aorta looks like a clogged drain from cross-section(which many Americans do; I can't speak for the peculiar vices of your country, having never been there) is self-destructive and just plain wrong. Like I said, I call actions evil, not people. If you go boozing when you should be studying, you're looking for trouble and will almost certainly find it, but I'm in no place to say you're going to hell. Have I ever told you such a thing?

Why worry about so many people? I honeslty don't give a damn if millions are fat, as long as me and those close to me aren't. It's their decision, they have enough information to know it is harmful. Same with abortion. If it is evil or good, it is up to the woman to decide, no one else. We are nobody to choose for her. I have never said abortion is ethical or not, I guess I would never know unless I was in the position to consider it. However I do not feel the government or a man in a robe should be the one to decide whether that is right or wrong.

The eating habits, the not studying, all that isn't even wrongdoing, it's just bad habits. They hurt no one but yourself. I do not understand why that is so important for proving that the world is a rotten place. Vices have always existed and always will because man is by nature weak. Religion won't change that. It might have changed you but you probably would have changed it through any other non-religious discipline.

No, religion can be perverted like anything else. I'm just saying that at least religious people, in theory at least, try to be good. And other animals have no need for charity. Most animals destroy only so far as they stand to gain from it, which is not good but about all you can expect from something with the brains of a dog. Only our close relatives, the chimps, murder and swindle for spite like we do. And chimps are some vicious frigging animals. Many other animals(think meerkats and various other herd animals) live in relative harmony, killing in self-defense and fighting amongst themselves only for mating and eating privileges. If a goose in a flock is wounded, other geese will drop back to help it on its way, and many pack animals act as nurses to orphans of their kind. Our altruism is nothing special in the animal kingdom.

Self defense, even in the name of the group can hardly be called altruism in the way that we do it. Just as we are capable of inficting infinitely more evil than the evilest of animals we are likewise capable of infinite more charity and care than the nicest of them.

According to records, He already tried it, about two thousand years ago. He performed several miracles but wound up dying rather slowly and painfully anyway. I know you don't believe it even happened the first time, but supposing it did, do you actually insist he do it again for you to see it?

Well, I think similarly of you, I assure you. From this fact we may deduce that we are a pair of arrogant ******.

Well, 2,000 years and he hasn't tried it again? Just once and he gave up? He could convert the world in a minute with just one bit of irrefutable proof of his existance (including myself). That really makes me wonder.

Finally, I stand to gain much more thinking this world is a better place than you thinking it is so sour and rotten. At least I can spend my angst complaining about REAL problems and not just everyday facets of human nature.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by DaShi
Believe in the CBeast!

That's just wrong!

[Elok]

I'm not even going to try and quote from both sets of answers; it'll get too confused. But I'll try and answer everything(I may quote occasionally).
Self-destructive behavior is wrong, insofar as the victim is willing but still hurt. I believe you should have a choice, but certainly it is not a sign of our clear thinking that we do that crap.
The correct answer to the abortion question is C: have some self-control or use a bloody condom. Trading a ten-second orgasm for a risk of pregnancy is idiotic. And exterminating your own bloodline, aside from being an insult to justice to kill one human being, not at fault, for the whims of another, would be considered stupid by most other animals. Abortion is, I'll admit, one of the areas that goes behind irrational to just plain barbarous.
Capitalism is the best of evils because, while the greatest number prosper, it still rewards the unscrupulous and creates profit for some at the expense of others. Socialism fails, so far as I can tell, due to the unwillingness of human beings to work for the common good without the incentive of personal profit. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with socialism, only with ourselves.

I honeslty don't give a damn if millions are fat, as long as me and those close to me aren't.

Religion may not be related to personal morality, but I must say that I have never heard a priest say anything like that...

SWEATSHOPS: An agrarian life involves less labor for better sustenance, and doesn't ruin the health of the worker. It's also more steady employment-sweatshops USE PEOPLE UP to meet bigger quotas for less cost. You cannot work 18-hour shifts every day without it destroying you in the long run. Ignorant sweatshop workers are strung along by the hopes of saving money for their families. The conditions they live in deaden them, body and soul. Try working like that for a couple of weeks. See if you're capable of making a rational decision at the end of it. Honest employment my ass. The wages are pathetic, the benefits nonexistent, the toll horrible. Even farming would be better.

Well, 2,000 years and he hasn't tried it again? Just once and he gave up? He could convert the world in a minute with just one bit of irrefutable proof of his existance (including myself). That really makes me wonder.

Not really. What would he do? Appear in a vision? You'd call it a mental breakdown. Raise the dead? You'd point to David Copperfield and laugh. Call down lightning? I'm guessing you would call it a hologram. Or an anomaly of physics. Or luck. According to record, he did such things then and they said he employed demons. Like you said, people haven't changed, only their beliefs. People who do not want to believe can stay stupid forever. And if the guy is omniscient, he hardly needs to "try" to know it will fail. He knew it would the first time, but did it anyway as a gesture of love.

Finally, I stand to gain much more thinking this world is a better place than you thinking it is so sour and rotten. At least I can spend my angst complaining about REAL problems and not just everyday facets of human nature.

I actually spend very little time worrying. I just refuse to accept flaws as bound to happen. I don't call them human nature because we all have moments of clarity, at some point in our lives, when truth becomes apparent for an instant. As I have told others on this board before, I am autistic. I have spent most of my life in inward contemplation. Stupid or cruel ideas are, in my experience, NOT a product of the human imagination.

Altruism: I suppose we can agree that a greater capacity for good and a greater capacity for evil are related, but like I said, there are many animals that help their friends selflessly and do nothing spiteful. Gorillas. Geese, as I mentioned. Hyenas. Animals that will go out of their way to help for no personal benefit, but will not harm without a chance of benefit. If they don't do heroic acts of altruism, that may very well be due to the fact that some animals don't have the intellectual capacity or the ability to overcome instinct, not to any quality of character. Actually, thinking about it, the fall ostensibly had effects on nature too, so I suppose comparisons are moot. The only answers come from inward contemplation.

And government is necessary

Yes, because without it we would be at each others' throats without fear of punishment.

Herod kills all boys in and around Bethlehem that are two years old and under. Such a massacre would certainly have been noted by contemporary historians. Yet not even Josephus, who documented Herod's life in detail, mentioned this event.

Didn't Josephus live to write his history only by betraying the Jewish resistance to the Romans? Wasn't he under close watch by Roman officials for all of his life following the capture of Jotapata(I think)? So he's a known traitor and subject to censorship. I don't call that a reliable source. May as well believe the Bible if we're going for utter accuracy.

Wouldn't this world be boring if we didn't have anyone to argue with?

If your happiness depends on argument, you're the one with the problem. I debate for intellectual stimulation. The squabbling and unpleasantness I could do without.
Lastly...

Vices have always existed and always will because man is by nature weak.

Do you mind if I take a look at the time machine you used to prove that? Not that I don't trust you.

[Bereta_Eder]

Re: A few questions for fellow atheists

Originally posted by Boshko
I know a lot of us are pretty outspoken in slamming theists whenever they pop out of their holes on forums, but how do you tend to act IRL? Any poor infidels stuck in the closet? What do you do when at a religious service (funeral, christmas service with family whatever)?

Personally I can't remember the last time I got in an argument with someone over a religion (not counting non-serious mocking of good friends), which is completely different than online where I think people are really asking for it if they start Bible thumping. The closest I ever really got was after I stint of posting on the Internet Infidel forums (which made me meaner and more anti-religious than I like to be due to the very anti-christian atmosphere and the annoying idiocy of the christians braved the atheist hordes) I wrote some really vitriolic rants in a History & Religion class (which my very religious prof ironically loved ).

Haven't been at any religious ceremonies in years aside from Christmas services where I refuse to kneel/take communion/pray but happily belt out Christmas carrols.

But then I haven't been exposed to really in your face Christianity (except for some Mennonites which are nice cuddly pacifist fundies) since my family isn't religious and my campus is a nice godless leftist bubble that probably has more practicing Jews and Buddhists than Christians. Hope I would be able to remain my nice tolerant open-minded self and not go off on rants about Biblical errancy and whatnot like do occasionally on 'poly (more a year or two than now, we don't seem to have had many religious threads this year, probably due to the tragic lack of CivNation...).

ah orthodoxy is so interwoven with hellenicity now that you can really interpet almost all religious ceremonies as cultural events, if you want too

one of my best friends is a devout christian BTW. you'll be amazed how many common things we have.

almost the same values I think.

[Bereta_Eder]

life has shown me with irefutable evidence that dividing the world between "believers" and "non believers" is just absurd, it just doesn't stand.

[Frogman]

Originally posted by paiktis22
life has shown me with irefutable evidence that dividing the world between "believers" and "non believers" is just absurd, it just doesn't stand.

So you hope

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Elok
Not really. What would he do? Appear in a vision? You'd call it a mental breakdown. Raise the dead? You'd point to David Copperfield and laugh. Call down lightning? I'm guessing you would call it a hologram. Or an anomaly of physics. Or luck. According to record, he did such things then and they said he employed demons. Like you said, people haven't changed, only their beliefs. People who do not want to believe can stay stupid forever. And if the guy is omniscient, he hardly needs to "try" to know it will fail. He knew it would the first time, but did it anyway as a gesture of love.

I find this sort of explanation patently rediculous. If you hold God up to be all-powerful and all-knowing, there are practically countless things he could do to let us know he existed, if he chose to. Do you think that such a "being" would be limited to appearing as a vision in some taco or sending down some lightning, which we see everyday? How about something more like five 10,000 foot high collumns of water off the coast of LA, all within a mile of each other, coupled with a booming voice coming from nowhere? Or, more simply, how about just making every single person unable to comprehend that he doesn't exist? After all, if he created us and has unlimited powers, these things would be no problem. I always love how religious people can put human bounds on an entity they consider has limitless power. Try thinking to the limits of your imagination, and then multiply it by 10 billion if you are really dealing with that kind of entity.

[Frogman]

Originally posted by Kontiki


Or, more simply, how about just making every single person unable to comprehend that he doesn't exist?

The only answer must be that he doesn't want us to know for sure. But if you don't believe it, your a$$ is toast. I work hard to be a Christian, but this concept just beyond my understanding. God's either sick and twisted or we have something wrong here.