Elton John: ban organised religion

[Sava]

atheism is faith too... and would also have to be banned

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Sava
atheism is faith too... and would also have to be banned

Huh? How is atheism faith?

[Heresson]

It is faith, though not organised.
EJ is obviously wrong. A very, very, very dumb thing to say

[Perfection]

Originally posted by Heresson
It is faith

No it isn't. You do not need faith in anything to be an atheist.

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Heresson
It is faith, though not organised.
EJ is obviously wrong. A very, very, very dumb thing to say

No. Atheism is no faith. And though I think it is impossible to ban organised religion EJ is right about the rest.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Hueij

No. Atheism is no faith. And though I think it is impossible to ban organised religion EJ is right about the rest.

Give up, they insist it is. You see, no theist seems to be capable of comprehending the concept of atheism...

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Perfection

No it isn't. You do not need faith in anything to be an atheist.

You have to believe God does not exist

[Whaleboy]

You have to believe God does not exist

No you don't. You have to believe that God positively exists. Faith is required to believe that, whereas all you need is a scientific viewpoint to concur with the view that God does not exist.

Therefore, atheism does not depend on faith.

QED

[Perfection]

Originally posted by Heresson
You have to believe God does not exist

It does not require faith to reject a non-falsifiable, and unevidenced belief, merely the knowledge that an idea that I pull out of my ass in about 2 minutes can have the same level of credence.

[Whaleboy]

More bigotry from aethiests

I would say that knowing the sort of stuff this guys comes out with, you'd be better off inferring that he views organised religion is a bad thing, rather than that he directly agrees with the view that organised religion should be banned.

I think most people agree that the human suffering caused by banning organised religion outright far outweighs the human suffering caused by its existence.

The point is arguable, but then I'd also add that anyone who is remotely educated should (one hopes) respect the individual, and even though he considers himself to be correct, would not force that conclusion upon others.

Far better in my view to keep a close eye on religions indoctrinating children, and vigorously educate children in science, reason, history and the humanities so that they are able to decide things for themselves, and not merely repeat parrot-fashion what they are taught at their mothers knee (a mechanism by which most religions propagate themselves).

If people are taught to think with logic and reason, then it stands to reason that the atheistic view, being inherently stronger than the theistic view, would achieve the acceptance it deserves. Therefore, banning religion would be unnecessary, we simply become to wise for it.

That's the optimistic, Bright view of course.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

We shouldn't ban organized religion.

We shouldn't ban cigarettes, either, but that doesn't change the fact that they're wholly destructive and that smoking them is stupid.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
No you don't. You have to believe that God positively exists. Faith is required to believe that, whereas all you need is a scientific viewpoint to concur with the view that God does not exist.

Therefore, atheism does not depend on faith.

QED

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say agnosticism (conceding that there may or may not be a god, because positive experience and the scientific method cannot necessarily provide a definite answer in either direction) does not depend on faith?

I'm certainly no theist, but the bald-faced assertion that a god must not exist simply because it hasn't been observed certainly sounds like blind faith to me...

[Perfection]

Originally posted by Darius871
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say agnosticism (conceding that there may or may not be a god, because positive experience and the scientific method cannot necessarily provide a definite answer in either direction) does not depend on faith?

I'm certainly no theist, but the bald-faced assertion that a god must not exist simply because it hasn't been observed certainly sounds like blind faith to me...

To be an atheist one is not required to say God must not exist. Generally, atheists just think that concepts of God are useless (except from a sociological perspective).

[Darius871]

Fair enough then if you offer that definition (even though it fundamentally differs from that found in most dictionaries). I'm just more comfortable with the term agnostic because the very roots of the word "a-the-ism" imply belief in non-existence of god to a lot of people, and thus confound the debate.

[Will9]

Atheism is not a faith, or a religon. It is a world view.