10 Things Christians and Atheists Can (And Must) Agree On
The war that's coming between the fundamentalist Christians and the hard-core Atheists probably won't be the most violent of the holy wars. But it has the potential to be the most annoying. Well, I'm going to try to stop it.
So I'm running into this guy basically everywhere I go:
Not that exact guy. People like him. I recognize the type, I had to spend the whole first half of my life around the Christian version of those guys, people who worked it into every conversation. But now I'm running into these really aggressive, sort of evangelical atheists. Ever since 9/11/2001, in fact. The exact day a whole lot of atheists decided this religion thing had to go before it killed us all.
These things never end well.
But I think we've got more common ground than we admit. For instance, both my atheist and Christian friends (I seem to have an equal number of both these days) tell me they agree with the following statement:
Celebrating the death of somebody you disagreed with pretty much makes you a dick.
I doubt anybody reading this has ever waved a snarky sign at a funeral, so I think we're pretty much all in the same boat still. See? Common ground.
So how about this: I'm going to throw out a few of these statements - things I think we have to agree on if we want to avoid disaster - and you can read until you see something you disagree with. We'll see how long we can make it last.
Why? Because something's brewing. I wander around my local Barnes & Noble and they've got a whole special table set aside:
I go home, log into one of my favorite forums and one guy's got this as his avatar:
And another dude has this:
So I retreat to my own forums, and find out turbo evangelist Jerry Falwell had died that day. The reaction?
I mean, that thing I said I said earlier about not celebrating the death of somebody you disagree with... that still counts for a bitter, uncompromising old fart like Falwell, right? We're civilized people. We can celebrate him changing his mind, or even celebrate him being made to look like a fool in public.
But you start cheering his death, you've walked away from the one single baseline every remotely moral person has ever agreed on: the value of human life. And I know we all agree on that, because we can all think of people we could've otherwise stabbed and gotten away with it.
And sure, there may be a few of my atheists out there saying that what Falwell was spewing was so hateful, that it surely inspired some murders (of homosexuals or abortion doctors or whatever) and that he thus deserved death on those grounds.
But you don't want to live by that rule; you'll wind up in a world where gangsta rappers and video game programmers and political commentators and novelists are considered worthy of death just because some fans claimed their work inspired them to kill. That's the sort of thing a nut from the other side would say. Right?
No, people got to have the right to express themselves, good, bad and ugly. Falwell had a family. Friends. He was a human being. You cheer over his corpse and you're just acting like a pecker.
And that's another thing both sides agree on, that we hate this modern trend toward peckerfication. So let's see what else we agree on...
(NOTE: Per international regulations governing all online religious debate, we are required to insert on each page humorous and inflammatory image macros such as the one below. To prove my objectivity, these have been carefully chosen as to be equally offensive to all belief systems. -MGMT )
1. You Can Do Terrible Things in the Name of Either One
We're putting aside the question of which belief system has killed more people by percentage of population, or whether a hypothetical world without religion would have seen fewer or more genocides than ours. We're not going to open a spreadsheet and try to count which belief system manufactures more murderous sociopaths per capita.
All I need from you is agreement that it's entirely possible for either an atheist or theist world to devolve into a screaming murder festival. The religious leader sends his people into battle because he thinks God commanded it, the Stalins and Maos of the world do the same because they see their people as nothing more than meaty fuel to be ground up to feed the machinery of The State. In both cases, the people are equally dead.
Yeah, yeah, I know the Christians are saying that the guy who fights an unjust or needless war is violating God's law, and thus isn't a good Christian. Meanwhile, the atheists are saying that Stalin was merely bloodthirsty, separate and apart from his disbelief in a higher power. Both believe, then, that it is a corruption of their belief system that allows unjust slaughter to happen.
But for this project, All we need to agree on is this: it happens in both cases. And if the opposing belief system vanished tomorrow, war and bloodshed and terror would still take place.
And can we further admit it's actually physically impossible to calculate whether, if your side had its way, the volume of terrible things happening would go up, or down, or stay the same? I know you have an opinion on that, and I can guess what it is. But we don't know, and can't state it like it's fact. Right?
Everybody still on board?
Good. Can we now also agree...
2. Both Sides Really Do Believe What They're Saying
Christians do this thing that drives atheists nuts, where they talk like God is patently obvious to all mankind, and that atheism is therefore just petty, intentional rebellion against Christians. In other words, that atheists don't honestly believe what they say, and just say it because they're jerks.
But atheists do something very similar, particularly when a Christian says:
"Only the saved go to Heaven!"
...and what the atheist hears is:
"I want everyone else to go to Hell!"
It's the same thing, thinking that deep down Christians don't really believe this is the law handed down by a creator, and therefore Christianity is just a petty, intentional rebellion against the non-Christians of the world. In other words, that Christians don't honestly believe what they say, and just say it because they're jerks.
But all that is just a way to make cartoon villains out of the people who disagree with us. And if we stop and think about it, we'll see it's asinine.
Atheists, you know that Christians have freaking died because they refused to walk away from what they believe. That goes beyond simple human stubbornness. I mean, I can tell you first hand. I was raised in a Pentecostal church (like the one they visited in the Borat movie).
I soured on the whole religion thing in my teens, as you can probably imagine, and then came back to it later kind of on my own terms. From that experience I can relay this fact: If there's no God, then there is something in the human brain that can and does present an amazingly realistic impression of one. A gland, an artifact of environmental pattern recognition, whatever you want to pin it on, the result is, at certain times and in certain moods, as tangible and real and distinct as the person sitting across from you on the subway.
You can say they're wrong. You can say it all day, you can etch "YOU'RE WRONG" into the surface of the moon with a giant laser. But you'll have a lot less angst if you remember that the thing they're wrong about is something they honestly believe, down to their roots. I guess you could just call them crazy, but it's a little silly to use that word when believers are the norm in human population.
But either way, it's not something they intentionally chose just to annoy you.
Christians, same deal. Every one of you have got friends and family who aren't believers. And I bet some of them are good people. Earnest people, thoughtful people. Charitable. Kind.
So... doesn't that kind of kill the premise that these people are avoiding God out of sinful rebellion or fear of having to live a godly life? After all, you've got people who are doing the hard part (self-sacrifice, patience, giving up all sorts of sinful pleasures) but are avoiding the easy part (praying and listening to a preacher talk for one hour a week). If God and the danger of Hell were that obvious, why wouldn't they just go all the way with it?
No, if there is a God, it appears that some good people honestly don't perceive him. For whatever reason. And there has to be some tolerance in God's rules for the Honest Mistake. Has to be. Otherwise we're all going to get screwed by that thing with the Sabbath being on Saturday instead of Sunday.
So, we've agreed that the other guy, no matter how irritating he or she is, is likely making an honest mistake. If we can agree on that, can we also agree that...
2-10 are good points, but 1 simply isn't true. Atheism does not provide a guide for life. You can't do something "because Atheism said so." Epicureans and Stoics are both basically atheistic, but they are opposing philosophies.
ReplyIt's funny how the comment section almost completely undoes all the good the article did.
ReplyI disagree on #1. Atheists don't have any principles other than a lack of belief in God. There's nothing else to atheism than that and any desire to murder is a problem that lies with the individual. In the bible, however, there is specific instructions to commit acts of genocide and murder reasons such as (ctrl+c, ctrl+v) "working on the Sabbath, being gay, cursing your parents, or not being a virgin on your wedding night." Atheism does not encourage murder or violence, whereas Christianity simply does.
ReplyYeah, but part of the point to the article was that Christianity evolves with the times. The Christians don't generally believe every word of the Bible, they don't follow everything it says, but they will SAY they do to position themselves further away from atheists as an act of defending their beliefs. I know a lot of Christians, but none of them believe people will go to hell for premarital sex, cursing your parents, etc. Part of being a Christian means that you can be forgiven for sinning.
Yeah, there are some Christian extremists, but they're rare.
Love.
ReplyI really can't stress how utterly crucial it is that everyone reads this article.
Replyi personally loved this article. I am not an atheist and not a christian but, i recognize this argument. I have a simmilar one...though mine involves my pagan (read: wiccan) beliefs and how they are outdated and anti-christian. i can tell you one thing i have a few simple rules about discussing religion: 1. I make sure they really want my pov 2. warn them that i may piss them off and 3. walk away if they do get pissed off...no point in keeping that going. (also if they are wearing a crucifix or cross don't bring it up whatsoever.)
ReplyThis is a terrific article, David. It's very thorough, and thought-provoking. But I just gotta say this. I am not Athiest, rather more accurately categorized as Agnostic. Though, if I had to pick one of the two general sides from your article, I guess I would fit better into the Athiest group.
ReplyNow, about how I perceive Christians. Here's the thing: I know that not all Christians are created equal, and I'm not the type of person to lump them all together and say "you're all bad people!". In fact, I don't even necessarily think any Christians are bad, even the zealots. I just think they are misguided.
Indeed, it seems to me there are two different kinds of Christians. On the left, you have the religious zealot like Fred Phelps. Putting aside for a moment, what my personal religious beliefs are, people like that truly ARE wrong. And they DESERVE to be called out. Not because they believe in God, but because they have some other seriously warped beliefs and perceptions that involve God. Now on the right, you have a morally upstanding, kind person who is a devout Christian. Perhaps this person is quite tolerant and even open-minded about other kinds of religious beliefs. I would CERTAINLY not try to hate on such a person, because they don't deserve it. However, it does not change the fact that I think they are BOTH mistaken in their beliefs about God. And vice-versa for what such a person would think of me and my lack of faith.
Basically what I'm trying to say is, don't assume all Atheists begin these arguments lumping together and completely dismissing all Christians, and vice-versa. There are actually some of us that can have respectful debates, then hopefully agree to disagree.
If you want a really clear and fair account of the differences between naturalists and supernaturalists, you may want to check out Dr. Christopher DiCarlo's latest book: "How to Become a Really Good Pain in the Ass: A Critical Thinker's Guide to Asking the Right Questions". It addresses many of the points raised in this article in a more comprehensive and cogent manner.
ReplyI am a Catholic and a scientist and I am sick of this whole Atheist v. Religion argument. Nobody knows who's right, so I'll make a deal with everyone. You believe what you believe and I'll do the same. I won't try to change you, and you do the same. Sound fair? Good! Argument is over!
ReplyIf you are a scientist then you should understand that one side is saying we have no evidence of a god and so we promote using science to help guide decisions and poilcy andnot letting blind faith or 1 book be the final word when it comes to morals and standards. i have no problems letting you believe anything you want, but it needs to stay out of govt and not given merit in science or public policy. YOU, (religous folk), prey on the most vulnerable and wont leave other people alone. If it wasnt your supreme goal to "save" everyone, then i wouldnt be so anti-theistic.
You're very confident in this universe of yours, aren't you? When one player gets too invested in the game, the others can't help but think he's silly and annoying. It's just a game to them after all. You understand that, right?
i know it will sound high and mighty to those that disagree, but I think it does a disservice to mankind to even acknowledge a religion as being on par with atheistic beliefs. Atheists believe there is no evidence showing a god, while religeous people have to blatantly go against evidence, (have faith) in order to accept their beliefs or they just believe without caring what evidence there is. I dont mind people not believing in science, but we should look at them the same way you perceive any other cult, and not let it influence public policies or what we teach kids. science is something you can test and it needs to hold up to those tests in order for us to give some validity to it. There is no way to test religion so they arent even on the same playing field.
ReplyAlso, morality clearly does not come from religion. i do not need a god to tell me that if i want to get along in this world, i need to adheir to a similar basic set of morals and not kill them. We could do a quick comparison chart to list the evil actions that were done in the name of religion vs. in the name of athiesm and everyone knows what that would look like.
yes we are all h**o sapiens living on the same planet, so there is always common ground, but to say that we shouldnt call out these organizations that continue to help kill millions of people with the denouncement of condoms and stem cell research and that continue to lie to children and tell them all of their loved ones will be in hell for eternity if they didnt love and fear an infinite dictator, it would be immoral not to fight against that. It has no place in mainstream discussions, especially when its being used as a tool to oppress and violate peoples inherent, (inherent in my opinion) rights, like on gay marriage, girl/boy circumcision, abortion, ownership of wwomen, etc.
btw, there are multiple definitions of athiest. i dont believe there is any evidence for a god, but i dont rule it out and i still consider myself atheist
Your arguments and the force or your accusations hold true only as long as your underlying assumptions are not questioned. Examine the most basic assumptions of your viewpoint and you will find most of it is based on nothing more than personal preference, if not outright prejudice and ignorance, which is inevitable in any case, but important to recognize, at least on some level.
As a person of faith who is studying to become a physicist, I'd like to point out that some of your starting positions and conclusions are not just fallacious, but also offensive.
The use of the term 'we' in reference to atheists as opposed to 'cults' for theists as though atheists alone should be setting public policy is antidemocratic and oppressive.
Religious people do not have to go against evidence. As this article points out, there is a very real sense of the divine that some people have. Whether it is something truly external, or whether it is a quirk of brain chemistry, I speak from experience when I say that this sense is real, and can be experienced outside the context of religion. Personally I lost my ability to believe in organised religion at the age of seven, due to what I perceived (and still perceive) as logical problems in following any one person's view of the divine, I have for all my life had a sense of the divine, and have thus sought a relationship with it. This is not evidence that I would expect would or should change the views of any person external to myself, but it is evidence in the same way that I can take the sounds from the next room as evidence that there is a television set playing in there. It is perceived, thus it should be taken as true until disproven.
Additionally, the author does not suggest that morality comes from religion, but rather that there is a moral impulse in each of us (if we are not psychologically damaged) and that impulse is the guiding principle that religion seeks to deal with, right or wrong. He stated that religion, if ultimately false, can be seen at least as an error in ascribing a moral structure to the universe at large, and inferring therefore that there must be something non-physical which transcends our experience, and embodies benevolence and justice.
I agree that any organisation which contributes or enacts the harm or oppression of others should be called out for that, but you over-generalise to say that the above list of injustices are in any way perpetrated or agreed with by all persons of faith. You say that there are different kinds of atheists, but you seem to want to see only one kind of religionist.
Further, the atheism that is popularised by science today is based on the assumption that the universe is essentially mechanistic in nature, that there is no element of what is that is not produced by matter and energy, but this is an article of faith, and an assumption, rather than a fact. No experiment has ever proven this, and there are a number of problems with this perspective that are yet unsolved, and - more importantly - may never be solved. Just like the Michelson Morley experiment disproved the widespread belief in luminiferous ether, which led to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, there are unanswered questions which leave entire vistas of reinterpretation open in science, from the foundational assumptions (such as the assumption that we are in an essentially mechanistic universe) on up.
actually the problem with atheism and rationalism is that it depends on the universe itself being a rational place...there is no rational explanation for why it should be this way all by itself...also atheists must depend on religion for any kind of definition of good...basically good to an atheist is his or her own preference...but this does not hold true for everyone so you in fact get right and wrong being determined solely on the basis of a majority consensus. atheists think its silly to believe that an intelligent, powerful being created everything but they believe its totally rational to believe that nothing created everything against all possible odds...actually atheism can easily be disproved by something as simple as a hut in the middle of a jungle...ask an atheist if the hut was assembled by accident and they will quite rightly say that it was made...even though they cannot see the builder...why? because we know from everyday experience that complex structures require intelligence...also atheists believe in dark matter and black holes even though neither can be seen...why? because they see the effects of these things they believe they must exist...so too when you look around at the complexity of life and the universe and yet behold the rationality of it you are seeing the effects of God and yet they deny His existence...this self-delusion...the frustrating thing about atheists is that they act as if the universe is moral while denying any kind of moral agent...in other words they want society to believe in evolution but live like God exists...
Replyatheists don't believe in the morality of the universe, we acknowledge the universe is not "rational" as that's a human emotion. The universe is governed by immutable laws, natural laws. Not an all seeing god or moral agent. also this irreducible complexity argument is flawed and lazy. We know a hut was built as we have seen others building a hut and we have the capability to build a hut. we don't need to see the huts builder. also comparing a jungle hut to, say the millions of different species of insect all evolved to adapt to their environment is not the same thing. Finally and most shockingly "also atheists must depend on religion for any kind of definition of good" trust me organised religion is the last place we look to see what is good. It's almost a how not too with the persecution, bigotry, murder, greed and corruption.
Also we don't "Believe" in Dark matter or black holes. There is no faith there. They have been proven by many, many people to exist. We don't believe, they just are. Scientific proof is really all we ask for. If someone scientifically proved the world way 10,000 years old and it was independently verified by unbiased scientists continuously for several years over and over trust me i would accept it as fact. So while someone has claimed to prove this there is not the massive scientific body of evidence, testing, research and agreement that there is for evolution. Don't let the name theory confuse you, that just means it's followed a scientific, mathematical process. It's not like a theory Colombo had for example.
I'm an atheist. I don't care what people believe in or not. Do I think it's silly that they believe god made the world in a week a few thousand years ago? Yes I do, mainly cos the age of the earth has been scientifically proven to be billions of years old. Do I troll around websites calling them retards? No. There is plenty I don't believe in but I am not trying to force people into believing what I do. which is something that I can't say about a lot of religious people, not just Christians of course (at least they don't fly planes into buildings). However I want it out of schools and out of politics. That a Presidential candidate can spew hatred of gays and foreigners in a nationally broadcasted campaign video and not be arrested is disgraceful. That someone like Glen Beck can say how they would like to murder a writer cos of some books and is still on the air is a joke. That gay people can still not get married pretty much everywhere is mind boggling. That pro-lifers can kill doctors and believe they are justified is absurd. This is what religion means to most atheists. We don't want to shut down churches or persecute peoples beliefs just because we don't agree with them, that would make us worse than religious nuts as we are supposed to be enlightened. What we really want is equal human rights for every one regardless or gender or sexuality or skin colour. We don't want someone else's rules and fake morality forced on us. Religion belongs in a church or in the privacy of your own home. Let everyone else get on with their lives and we will let you get on with yours.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesTotally nailed it, bro!
I'm Christian, Catholic to be exact. Not everyone who believes in God necessarily believes every exact word the Bible says (and, like one of my Protestant friends, believes the Bible is mired in metaphors to make it simpler for the time it was made). I do believe in God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and in general what the Bible teaches. But, I also believe in evolution, that the Earth is 4 billion years old, and other scientific FACTS that are absolutely proven; how I work this into my faith is my problem to deal with, as they are absolutely true.
That said, I also have Atheist and Agnostic friends. I enjoy their company because neither of us brings up heated debates about God, lack of God, etc. Instead, we focus on things that we like mutually - football, games, books, and other such common interests.
People are people, regardless of which religion they do(n't) believe in. It's the people on both sides who are constantly bashing the other side who just f**k everything up for everyone.
I should also point out that the whole purpose of life on earth according to the bible is to foster Free Will. God could, if he wanted to just make humans live in heaven but that's totally not what he wanted. That's what angels are for, Instead we have a choice, to follow god or not. If there was actual proof he existed would anyone choose the alternative? If god showed up tomorrow and said "hey, seeing as how you guys are still alive and I'm ending the world and anything I'll forgive ya'll and you can all go to heaven... unless you'd rather burn in hell for all eternity" who'd actually pick the hell option? we're all sensible enough to pick the one that involves everything being awseome. So god made the world "In Medias Res," The world is several billion years old AND 8000 years old AT THE SAME TIME because when the world was created it was created as a world that had been around for billions of years
When a person creates a story do they always start at the beginning of the story? Of course not, I sure as hell haven't had every movie start with the creation of the universe,most don't even start with the birth of the characters, We meet them midway through their lives, at the part where it becomes interesting.
That's my own opinion of course!
1. You Can Do Terrible Things in the Name of Either One
ReplyAbsolutely not. No atheist ever claims they're doing things for Atheism. Ofcourse, there may be those who do things because it's the only reasonable thing to do. For example, an atheist may endorse murdering the president of a country who plans to give orders to nuke his country (which has done nothing bad) and all his guards too. Problem is, that most of these guards are innocent. Why murder them? Answer is simple, because they're indirectly supporting a person who could be responsible for the murder of many more innocents.
2. Both Sides Really Do Believe What They're Saying
Naturally. How can someone not believe something he/she is passionate about? What really matters is that whether the belief is backed up by reason and logic and does it harm anybody?
3. In Everyday Life, You're Not That Different
True. Everyone follows laws of physics to get their work done. But, you are not entirely accurate when it comes to atheists. When atheists talk about morality, they aren't talking about certain rules that have to be followed because they are obvious or they are absolute. Atheists definitely do not believe in absolute morality. For example, an atheist may believe that murder is immoral, however that same atheist may murder someone in self defense and still see the murder as moral. You see, it's not absolute, but flexible. The morality that atheists believe in is a code that protects innocents from being exploited by others. That is all. They just use the words "right" and "justice" because they're convenient to use. Your "girlfriend sex" example isn't actually relevant. You see, relationships are sacred to people. If something disturbs their relationship, they're bound to get pissed. As for atheists saying "Come on! It's just meat! We're all just mammals! Sex is natural! What are you afraid of?!?!?", they were just displaying the very human tendencey of not empathizing with others. Come on! Theists do it too! Especially when talking about how glad they are that Hitchens is dead, or how he must be getting whipped in hell now. You can't defend that. Both atheists and theists fail the test of empathy.
4. There Are Good People on Both Sides
Duh. Good deeds do not require you to believe in god. Man made morality, not god.
5. Your Point of View is Legitimately Offensive to Them
Not quite. Atheists rather find theists' point of view hilarious rather than offensive. But, theists get offended by atheists' viewpoint. I'll agree to that. Atheists are being stupid (sorry guys, it's the truth) when they outright contradict the theistic views. If they could empathize with theists (sheesh! why do most humans suck at empathy!?) they would understand that saying "God doesn't exist" doesn't prove anything to theists. Infact, sometimes, it makes their belief stronger.
6. We Tend to Exaggerate About the Other Guy
Hah! We do indeed! I stopped doing that ever since exaggeration got me in trouble! :P
7. We Tend to Exaggerate About Ourselves, Too
Referring to the "love" and "free will" parts..
You're taking things too literally here. Seriously. Just because atheists think rationally, do they have to complicate their lives by thinking about everything completely accurately? The human mind lacks that capacity. Sure, we are aware of how things work in our body. We know that love is a biological reaction, but that is how a third person would view it. When it comes to first person, we think of love as a feeling, not a reaction. And, therefore, we accept both as true. Similar is the case of free will.
8. Focusing on Negative Examples Makes You Stupid
Umm.. Shouldn't this be a part of "6. We Tend to Exaggerate About the Other Guy"?
9. Both Sides Have Brought Good to the Table
Well, we humans tend to ignore the good the other side has brought. Didn't I already say that we humans lack empathy?
10. You'll Never Harass the Other Side Out of Existence
This! I agree with this completely!
1. It may not be the goal, but some people do claim they've done things in the name of Atheism.
7. Implies that religious people don't think rationally (my friends often say I can be pessimistic because I think rationally, and I am religious).
Other than those two specific points, I agree with what you said.
1. Please explain what communist revolutionaries the world over were doing when they rounded up and tortured to death clergy, the elderly, and anyone who tried to argue against atheism. Besides, you could argue that Christianity teaches life is a gift from God and no man has the right to steal it, or that violence violates the commandment to love. It does not signify.
2. Reason and logic can back up literally anything (except the denial of one's own existence) if one adopts the proper axioms and assumptions.
3. Even the church literally says violence and murder for the sake of self defense and so forth are acceptable. Everybody's flexible.
4.Don't be a dick, dude.
5. And I just think atheism and all atheistic thought is boring and often pretentious.
6. You haven't stopped.
7. He's pointing out empiricism is nobody's guide to life, and you're helping him.
8.Ten is a cool number.
9. Study psychology. Empathy has been proven. Even psychopaths aren't deficient in it. (they just lack fear) But if its your personal philosophy, I assume it helps you.
10. See, isn't t great having a whole ten points to make? And, actually, harassing people into oblivion can work. It was pretty successful against atheism for most of history and it's ground several religions into dust. All you need is authority.
Excellent article. One fact correction, though. Conservatives aren't the only people who enjoy reading Ann Coulter. Many people are unaware she is actually a visitor from a parallel universe (where humans evolved from the same ancestor as praying mantises), and they find her version of history hilarious.
ReplyI, love you man.
ReplyThe level of paranoia on both sides of the issue is hilarious! Atheists- paranoia is a part of the human experience. Theists- paranoia is a part of the human experience. One of the great things we often forget is that from a challenge to theism came immense critical thinking and technology. On the same tangent, from the embrace of theism (not just Christianity), came the brilliance of humanities. Tolerance isn't proving yourself right and the other person wrong, it's being secure in what you have and letting no one dictate your thoughts for you. Lead by example, it's the only logical answer.
ReplyI find it funny how the most ignorant comments below were clearly written by atheists. Although they don't have a monopoly on ignorance; correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't God supposed to love everyone, even those who have sinned against Him? So isn't anyone who says "God hates ___" just displaying ignorance of their own religion?
ReplyI personally walk a fine line between both sides; I don't buy into any organized religion, least of all Christianity, mainly because of the impossibility of knowing exactly what happened 2K+ years ago(how many Causcasians were born in Bethlehem that long ago?), let alone whenever the world began, for lack of a better term. That, and it's hard to believe in a paradise in the clouds when we've been to the moon. But this doesn't mean I don't believe in some incomprehensible force influencing events for some purpose I don't fully understand, most likely it's own freakish amusement. But I am courteous enough to allow others to believe whatever the Hell they want, so long as they don't knock on my door trying to push faith on me(I'm looking at you, Jehovah's Witnesses).
Although, on the rare occasions I felt saucy, I did invite one or two in for a lively discussion(read ill-reasoned attempts to convert me while I openly mocked them for knowing less about their religion than I do). At least one left questioning his faith, though I suspect another did too, he just didn't want to admit it.
No matter which religion, if any, we're raised with, people should be smart enough to know that faith can't be forced; you can't make someone believe something. Unless they're on certain drugs; when they're high, some motherfuckers will believe anything.
My dad gives them a complete history of every religion. They wanna ignore the "No Soliciting" sign...
1. You Can Do Terrible Things in the Name of Either One :
Reply Hide All See All 5 Replieswrong, no-one does anything 'in the name of atheism', that doesn't even make sense.
2. Both Sides Really Do Believe What They're Saying :
correct, but atheists typically believe that because they have checked their facts and done their research, and are willing to change their minds, if they are ever proven wrong.
3. In Everyday Life, You're Not That Different :
incredibly wrong, religion is a plague upon politics which in turn, is a plague upon the people (take a look at the candidates for the american presidency, they are all nutters).
4. There Are Good People on Both Sides :
correct, just because you believe in a magical man in the sky, doesn't mean you can't also be a good person.
5. Your Point of View is Legitimately Offensive to Them :
true? but irrelevant.
6. We Tend to Exaggerate About the Other Guy :
true? but irrelevant.
7. We Tend to Exaggerate About Ourselves, Too :
true? but irrelevant.
8. Focusing on Negative Examples Makes You Stupid :
true so compare the total ammount of bad things religion has done vs the good they have done and they are WAY behind.
10. You'll Never Harass the Other Side Out of Existence :
true, but we may EDUCATE it out of existence (hopefully)
so yeah.
you didn't get the point of this article did you?
Your comment is proof that atheist can be just as ignorant and stupid as christians.
I revoke your atheist status. You're making us look bad. Check that; you're making humanity look bad.
Wait, this article had a point other than a theist saying "hey, I've seen things from both sides and this is what y'all are doing wrong... honest... I'm not biased at all"?
I agree with everyone who disagreed with Brae. The world wouldn't be a better place without religion, it would be a better place without people like you.
On the subject of morality, I encourage everyone to look up oxytocin - the "moral molecule" (not to be confused with Oxycontin) that all mammals (and apparently only mammals) possess. Paul Zak argues that this chemical is what makes us empathetic, moral, and generally not jerks to each other. The evidence he provides is very compelling and is all explained in a TED talks video. Take from it what you will.
ReplyWas going to say the exact same thing. We humans aren't THAT special when it comes to empathy and compassion....
I just registered to say that this is a great article.
Reply