Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 210
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.Page 9 of 12    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)
I just happened to be in the middle of editing...adding "or others" while you were writing your post CressB. Good on you ;)
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 211
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 6/27/2014 4:50:21 PM
:)


Messages this short may not be posted
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 212
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 6/27/2014 5:13:07 PM
msg 236:

Last paragraph should say "weak" not "week".
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 213
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 6/28/2014 6:03:55 AM

It seems that a lot of religious people claim not to mind if their partners or others have their own way of being spiritual or religious as long as they don't stomp on their ways.

Funny that their religious leaders/priests/rabbis etc. don't have the same openness and actually perpetuate fear for not practicing in the ways they are told to demand of the followers. (or risk burning in hell, being shunned, gossiped about or ridiculed...).

I wonder why that is? hmmmm...

Actually I know why that is...those that write the rules want full dollar devotion for their investment to bring the "light" to others.

Who are the hypocrites claiming to love peace yet don't allow freedom of choice? Those that wrote the rules claiming to be inspired.

They are inspired all right, by the almighty dollar.

Those that follow the rules often seem scared not to, but would be accepting of other faiths if allowed to or if they felt safe to do so.

btw, I do not believe in "god" nor am I religious or spiritual.


From my studies of religious movements and of political movements (often closely related, especially intellectually), I would agree with what you say, as far as it goes, but you've only included half the story. There are other big reasons why SOME people want hard and fast (fast referring to the old meaning, as in "fastened down") rules. They are no more correct than the greedy ones you describe, but if you want to deal with a problem, it's important to correctly identify it.

One, is that that lots of these people genuinely believe that there IS just one Right Way to do things, and they think that they are RESCUING THE WORLD when they demand that everyone do as they say. Mother Theresa might be an example of this kind, in that she insists on a painful life for everyone including herself. She sin't in it for the wealth, she's in it for the personal emotional reward that comes from "fighting for what you know is absolutely right."

Another, is that lots of people get stuck on the idea that Dad's and Mom's dad's dad's mom's mom's and so on's great great whatever, DID know what was best for everyone. In many ways, belief in gods really is an extension of the conclusion that many babies come to, that Mom and Dad know EVERYTHING, and so we should do whatever they say. When we discover that our parents are flawed, it's common to decide that THEIR parents must have got it right, and that OUR parents were the ones who screwed up, and so on. At the core of it all, is the assumption that there IS such a thing as the exact right way to live ones life, and the search for a god, is the manifestation of the search for that (probably non-existent) exact right way to live.

Along the way, such people build a set of processes and ways of behaving, much like the "red flag " collections and "rules for successful mating" some online daters build up. It's common in all such areas of human endeavor, that what was once put into place as a stop-gap measure, to deal with an immediate concern, has it's "purely temporary" origin forgotten. Then "tradition" takes over, and people insist on following a path, not because it actually works, but simply because it's well-worn areas provide them the illusion that lots of other people have successfully gone before.

In fact, if the only reason for rule sets WAS greed, it would be far easier for the bulk of the population to recognize them as such. It is only the fact that there are lots of NON-greed based reasons for belief systems, that allows the greedy people to successfully fool everyone.
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 214
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 6/28/2014 11:36:13 AM
Group-entities:

I think that just generally speaking we were concerned with emergent properties, and emergent behaviors. There is that phenomena whereby traits seem to emerge. A group or organization be composed of people or decided by people, or seeming to be clever or not, or manipulating or not...seems to either be picking on details that aren't relevant, or is to forget or deny certain facts about such things like emergence.


Fascism:

I generally think of fascism as putting the most power in the least number of hands. Which can include an uninformed or uneducated public, or a public which is of the "follower" mindset (or rather, the attempt to make things so). As this applies to religion...religion seems to condition and prep the mind/psyche of people for a fascist structure in society, either in microcosm or macrocosm.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 215
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 6/28/2014 11:50:53 AM

Actually I know why that is...those that write the rules want full dollar devotion for their investment to bring the "light" to others.

Who are the hypocrites claiming to love peace yet don't allow freedom of choice? Those that wrote the rules claiming to be inspired.

They are inspired all right, by the almighty dollar.


Pretty much. There is a lot of foreign investment to build churches and mosques around the world to promote their religions. It's basically just a big business with political, economic, and judicial elements. If you want spirituality, just leave your house and be nice to people.
 RedrockJen
Joined: 3/27/2014
Msg: 216
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 6/29/2014 8:41:40 PM
Run of the mill atheism has no doctrines. Makes no claims whatsoever. It simply does not accept the claims of theists. Period. Strong atheists do, however, assert there is no god. So that is a belief: a doctrine of sorts.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 217
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/1/2014 12:01:26 PM
Yesterday 's 5-4 ruling in the supreme court just gave "closely held" corporations religious rights. ("90% of corporations may qualify and they employ 52% of u.s. workers").

Say goodbye to your birth control if you work for a religious corporation.

This decision (read: can of worms ) will cost tax payers a fortune in legal bills (way to go religious lobbyists! -not).

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-28100921

...more consequences coming... like racism, sexism, sexual homophobia, xenophobia...

Corporations with the more rights than people has got to stop.

(statism is not the answer...YOU are...BOYCOTT!).




What doctrine does any atheist group have?


statism often applies here.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 218
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/1/2014 12:05:08 PM
#234:

If you want to say that atheists don't have a doctrine, then who am I to take that doctrine away from you?

Playing word games can be fun, but it doesn't move a serious discussion forward. And when done in an effort to gain the rhetorical upper hand, it conveys smugness.

Surely atheists in all their self-assured wisdom aren't this fixated on splitting mundane rhetorical hairs. Practically speaking, what's the difference between concluding that gods don't exist and not concluding that they do, another argument about faulty premises? Zzz

Yes, when "splitting mundane rhetorical hairs," concluding incorrectly, and getting called on it, accuse the one correcting you of splitting mundane rhetorical hairs.

And the answer to your question is: burden of proof.

That one sounds more agnostic than atheist to me. I mean just based on the noise that I typically hear coming out of certain self-described atheists. Many of them seem to be actively engaged in demanding that god doesn't exist and insisting that anyone who doesn't hold the same belief is a moron. Maybe it's these shitty atheist bars I'm hanging out in.

As has been said, defining terms becomes an issue. What you describe are strong atheists, not atheists in general.

#245:

Run of the mill atheism has no doctrines. Makes no claims whatsoever. It simply does not accept the claims of theists. Period. Strong atheists do, however, assert there is no god. So that is a belief: a doctrine of sorts.

Pretty much! Even so, I get the idea even from strong atheists that if compelling evidence for a deity were to surface, they would reconsider their stance. Not so for people of faith. But no atheist is going to be holding their breath for such evidence to arise!
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 219
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/1/2014 12:16:54 PM


If you want to say that atheists don't have a doctrine, then who am I to take that doctrine away from you?



just another human being allowed their opinion, says the anarchist.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 220
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/1/2014 3:39:04 PM

If you want to say that atheists don't have a doctrine, then who am I to take that doctrine away from you?


Being an atheists simply means you lack the belief in God or gods. It's not a belief and it doesn't have doctrines, similar to the way that not collecting coins isn't a hobby.
 GreenThumbz18
Joined: 4/25/2012
Msg: 221
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 7:09:52 AM
Do people who don't collect coins spend lots of time and energy to convince coin collectors how foolish they are?
 Bentheredunthat
Joined: 1/9/2014
Msg: 222
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 7:48:29 AM

Do people who don't collect coins spend lots of time and energy to convince coin collectors how foolish they are?


Do people who collect coins spend their time trying to force their philately on others? Do they seek to legislate philately as the only morally correct hobby? Do they seek to intrude into the bedrooms of non coin collectors to make sure whatever activities they engage in there are as holy as philately?
 GreenThumbz18
Joined: 4/25/2012
Msg: 223
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 8:09:32 AM
^^^^^^
(You might want to look up philately before spouting foolish statements.)
 Bentheredunthat
Joined: 1/9/2014
Msg: 224
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 9:50:52 AM
You might want to look up philately before spouting foolish statements.


Should I assume you are incapable of understanding the example, and why people would be opposed to the self-righteous encroachment of any religion into their lives and their countries laws?
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 225
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 10:23:30 AM

Do people who don't collect coins spend lots of time and energy to convince coin collectors how foolish they are?


No.
Are you saying that atheists have a "doctrine" because many of them engage in religious debates? I don't think discussing religion magically turns atheism into a believe system. It's still the absence of belief.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 226
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 10:44:52 AM
It's still the absence of belief.


For whom exactly? Certainly not for those atheist who claim that "there is no god", which is most certainly a belief, seeing as how it is not a proven concept. It baffles me as to why you people, who are obviously agnostic, will not simply disassociate yourselves with those claiming "there is no god", by calling yourselves what you are: agnostic. Can anyone explain this nonsense?
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 227
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 11:01:25 AM

For whom exactly? Certainly not for those atheist who claim that "there is no god", which is most certainly a belief, seeing as how it is not a proven concept. It baffles me as to why you people, who are obviously agnostic, will not simply disassociate yourselves with those claiming "there is no god", by calling yourselves what your are: agnostic. Can anyone explain this nonsense?


It's just a statement from one person. What they probably should say is: "There probably is no God". Atheism is still the absence of belief. If a person that doesn't collect coins says: "Coin colleting is a waste of a time", he doesn't turn not collecting coins into a hobby. He's simply expressing his opinion about coin collecting.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 228
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 11:09:42 AM
It's just a statement from one person.


What do you mean it's just one person? I known MANY atheists who claim "there is no god".

Besides YOU ARE AN AGNOSTIC! Just say that you are an agnostic, instead of this non-belief bullsh!t.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 229
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 11:29:13 AM

What do you mean it's just one person? I known MANY atheists who claim "there is no god".

Besides YOU ARE AN AGNOSTIC! Just say that you are an agnostic, instead of this non-belief bullsh!t.


Why do I have to say anything? I'm not talking about myself. One person can't claim to speak for all atheists just like one person that doesn't collect coins can't speak for everyone that doesn't collect coins. A person saying "There is no God" usually means to say "There probably is no God" because it's impossible to prove a negative.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 230
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 11:43:05 AM
One person can't claim to speak for all atheists...


And then you make this statement:


A person saying "There is no God" usually means to say "There probably is no God" because it's impossible to prove a negative.


?

Apparently you have no problem with self contradiction.

And what does this mean:


Why do I have to say anything? I'm not talking about myself.


Because it is a conversation directed at you. Here let me make it easier for you:

Hay Coma, what is your stance on religion and god?

I can give you my answer to these questions really easily:

Religion: I am an anti-theist, out of a concern for perceived moral violations committed by religions/the religious.

God: I am an agnostic.


because it's impossible to prove a negative.


Also, it is not impossible to prove a negative, as I have already proved elsewhere on the forum:

http://forums.plentyoffish.com/15489465datingPostpage6.aspx
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 231
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 11:53:20 AM

Because it is a conversation directed at you. Here let me make it easier for you:

Hay Coma, what is your stance on religion and god?

I can give you my answer to these questions really easily:

Religion: I am an anti-theist, out of a concern for perceived moral violations committed by religions/the religious.

God: I am an agnostic.


No, it's not. The conversation is about theism and atheism, not about my personal beliefs. I fail to see how personal beliefs are relevant to the discussion. There is no doctrine or dogma in atheism. It's only the absence of belief in dieties. There is no "self contradiction". You're just failing to read between the lines. A person that says "There is no God" is usually just being lazy instead of explaining the probability that there is no God.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 232
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 12:12:50 PM
I fail to see how personal beliefs are relevant to the discussion.


Because I have just made the conversation about you personally:


Hay Coma, what is your stance on religion and god?


Why not just answer the question?


There is no doctrine or dogma in atheism.


I never said that there was. what I spasifically said what that, for MANY atheist, the claim "there is no god" is sincere. I know this because I've talked to many atheist about this topic spacifically, and had them elaborate their position.


You're just failing to read between the lines.


No I am not.


A person that says "There is no God" is usually just being lazy instead of explaining the probability that there is no God.


And there you go again, speaking for all atheists. *shakes his head*

"There is probably no god" is an agnostic statement! The better statement, however, would be to simply say "I don't know if there is a god or not", give the grossly inadequate state of human knowladge, concerning exactly how/why reality IS, to be making a statement like "there is probably no god".
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 233
view profile
History
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 12:27:02 PM

Because I have just made the conversation about you personally:


No, the conversation isn't about me as a person. It's about beliefs. We're not discussing people. You might as well ask what I had for breakfast.


Why not just answer the question?


What's the point?


And there you go again, speaking for all atheists. *shakes his head*

"There is probably no god" is an agnostic statement!


It's actually closer to an atheist perspective because agnostism takes a neutral stance where a person neither believes or disbelieves. For example, saying "No one can know if God exists or not" is an agnostic perspective.
 Bentheredunthat
Joined: 1/9/2014
Msg: 234
Life Liberty and the Religious factor.
Posted: 7/3/2014 1:04:52 PM

What do you mean it's just one person? I known MANY atheists who claim "there is no god".


Then these many people you know are not really Atheists - or you did not understand what they claim - or you are misrepresenting their claim.

An Atheist will simply claim "There is no evidence for any god". That's not a belief. It's a demonstrable fact.

The people you are citing are more accurately called Anti-theist.

An Agnostic is just a wimp that will not commit and so claims "Gee, I'm not really sure what I think."
;-)
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >