This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Debate: Can Atheists and Believers work together for the common good?

Debate: Can Atheists and Believers work together for the common good? - Comments

gordon's Avatar Comment 1 by gordon

No, not on anything useful.

Mon, 21 May 2012 16:42:42 UTC | #942623

gordon's Avatar Comment 2 by gordon

No, not on anything useful.

Mon, 21 May 2012 16:43:14 UTC | #942624

Sean_W's Avatar Comment 3 by Sean_W

Comment Removed by Author

Mon, 21 May 2012 16:47:48 UTC | #942626

MAJORPAIN's Avatar Comment 4 by MAJORPAIN

Unfortunately we're going to have to try. Haven't listened to this yet, but this is my feeling. There are too many of them for us to be able to get anything useful done without them. Somehow we've got to get them to see that this is the better way forward because they're sure it isn't and that is a problem. A big problem.

Mon, 21 May 2012 17:39:40 UTC | #942628

casaoui-cool's Avatar Comment 5 by casaoui-cool

I see not why atheists & believers would not be able to or cannot work together for the common good .

Much better : they already do in fact , if we put aside the fanatics from both sides at least .

Believers & atheists can work together , live together with mutual respect , while not trying to impose their own views on each other .

P.S.: I will listen later to the above mentioned stuff .

I have been following the work of many atheists scientists , thinkers ....such as Dawkins , Dennett , Harris , Hitchens ...even though i do not always agree with what they say : i did learn a lot from them though, i still do in fact .

Mon, 21 May 2012 18:28:24 UTC | #942635

Peter Grant's Avatar Comment 6 by Peter Grant

http://rationalist.com.au/images/mp3/The_Road_Less_Traveled_Can_atheists_and_believers_work_together_for_the_common_good.m4a PZ Myers in Australia

PZ is right. We don't respect their ridiculous beliefs and I don't see why we should to pretend to. When they stop believing nonsense they can join our group, but until they do we will keep ridiculing them. I'd even go so far as to say that we have a moral obligation to do so.

Mon, 21 May 2012 19:09:22 UTC | #942641

strangebrew's Avatar Comment 7 by strangebrew

I very much doubt believers would actually risk their soul fraternizing with the 'enemy' in any meaningful way...

Mon, 21 May 2012 19:35:53 UTC | #942649

littletrotsky13's Avatar Comment 8 by littletrotsky13

I don't see why not. It's sort of the point of secularism really, that the belief/non-belief shouldn't be an issue.

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:02:00 UTC | #942656

casaoui-cool's Avatar Comment 9 by casaoui-cool

Comment 6 by Peter Grant :

http://rationalist.com.au/images/mp3/The_Road_Less_Traveled_Can_atheists_and_believers_work_together_for_the_common_good.m4a PZ Myers in Australia

PZ is right. We don't respect their ridiculous beliefs and I don't see why we should to pretend to. When they stop believing nonsense they can join our group, but until they do we will keep ridiculing them. I'd even go so far as to say that we have a moral obligation to do so.

You seem to be totally unaware of the fact that what you were saying was / is the very definition of ...fascism, ironically enough .

Congratulations .

What makes you think you possess or monopolise the truth, buddy ?

Ridiculous pretentious intolerance : science should make you humble, people .

P.S.: I do think, at the other hand , that all beliefs , cultures , thoughtstreams ...do have some elements of truth here & there , to some extent at least ,including the secular or atheistic ones ,so.

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:08:02 UTC | #942657

casaoui-cool's Avatar Comment 10 by casaoui-cool

Comment 8 by littletrotsky13 :

I don't see why not. It's sort of the point of secularism really, that the belief/non-belief shouldn't be an issue.

Exactly :

That's even the very point of...democracy , i should add

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:10:24 UTC | #942658

casaoui-cool's Avatar Comment 11 by casaoui-cool

Comment 4 by MAJORPAIN :

Unfortunately we're going to have to try. Haven't listened to this yet, but this is my feeling. There are too many of them for us to be able to get anything useful done without them. Somehow we've got to get them to see that this is the better way forward because they're sure it isn't and that is a problem. A big problem.

You know what ?

I do not agree with this kindda categorization or polarization : believers vs atheists ,simply because we are individual humans in the first place :

simply because we are no cultures, no beliefs , no societies , ....we are just individuals humans

We can work together for the common good & for the good of this planet & humanity as individuals humans while putting aside our own differences by focussing more on what binds us as humans .

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:14:54 UTC | #942660

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 12 by Red Dog

Comment 7 by strangebrew :

I very much doubt believers would actually risk their soul fraternizing with the 'enemy' in any meaningful way...

In spite of your doubts it already happens all the time and has been happening for a long time. Many of the most dedicated people working for social justice and world peace are "believers" and they work with atheists and agnostics all the time. Some famous examples are Daniel Berrigan and Martin Luther King. I've also personally worked with many believers on these issues and I've often been impressed by their dedication and commitment.

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:17:26 UTC | #942662

xsjadolateralus's Avatar Comment 13 by xsjadolateralus

Hitchens laid out why our worldviews are simply irreconcilable, rather than just being in conflict, or struggling to find a better configuration, common ground. No, we are simply opposed.

It's like asking if the two football teams competing in the super bowl could work together.

It's a failure to fully comprehend the scope of reality.

Without trying to sound like an extremist, ehem. We have a clear dichotomy between peace and annihilation. You either live in the past or the future. For those who don't understand this. Those who live in the past are left in the past. History, fossils... extinction...

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:18:48 UTC | #942664

xsjadolateralus's Avatar Comment 14 by xsjadolateralus

Comment 12 by Red Dog :

Comment 7 by strangebrew :

I very much doubt believers would actually risk their soul fraternizing with the 'enemy' in any meaningful way...

In spite of your doubts it already happens all the time and has been happening for a long time. Many of the most dedicated people working for social justice and world peace are "believers" and they work with atheists and agnostics all the time. Some famous examples are Daniel Berrigan and Martin Luther King. I've also personally worked with many believers on these issues and I've often been impressed by their dedication and commitment.

Listen to what you're saying. "These people act so good, it's as if they're hardly religious at all".

This isn't an avenue we should consider. I stand firm with PZ and Hitchens, and many others. Humanists need to be, above all, honest. You cannot be intellectually honest with yourself if you are failing to abruptly address any bit of nonsense someone uses to justify their inane beliefs which do real harm now, right now.

And again, it doesn't matter how much "good" you can do with this. Religion may get kids off drugs, help society (doubtful) but it doesn't make it's teachings moral, or it's factual claims true and at the end of the day we WILL ALWAYS HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT.

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:27:20 UTC | #942668

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 15 by Red Dog

Comment 9 by casaoui-cool :

Comment 6 by Peter Grant : ...

PZ is right. We don't respect their ridiculous beliefs and I don't see why we should to pretend to. When they stop believing nonsense they can join our group, but until they do we will keep ridiculing them. I'd even go so far as to say that we have a moral obligation to do so.

You seem to be totally unaware of the fact that what you were saying was / is the very definition of ...fascism, ironically enough .

Congratulations .

What makes you think you possess or monopolise the truth, buddy ?

Ridiculous pretentious intolerance : science should make you humble, people .

P.S.: I do think, at the other hand , that all beliefs , cultures , thoughtstreams ...do have some elements of truth here & there , to some extent at least ,including the secular or atheistic ones ,so.

Yes, its amazing that people who claim to be dedicated to "critical thinking and evidence-based understanding" can take such intolerant closed minded views.

BTW, I don't personally think that all beliefs have some elements of truth. I think some beliefs such as Christianity are just wrong. However, its ridiculous to automatically assume that just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue that you treat that person with contempt until they agree with you.

Even more than my belief in atheism is my belief in reason. And to have reasonable debates and analysis with others its essential that you treat people with respect even when, especially when, you disagree with them.

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:27:54 UTC | #942669

xsjadolateralus's Avatar Comment 16 by xsjadolateralus

Comment Removed by Author

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:35:22 UTC | #942671

xsjadolateralus's Avatar Comment 17 by xsjadolateralus

Comment 16 by xsjadolateralus :

However, its ridiculous to automatically assume that just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue that you treat that person with contempt until they agree with you.

Hypothetical:

Person A thinks person B should die. Person B disagrees and gives reasons. Person A disregards reasons and insists person B should die.

Well, by your standards, we shouldn't treat person A with contempt. Nor those who think we should be splattered on pavement, bombed to annihilation, take away child/woman rights, secularism. We shouldn't treat them with contempt.

Psychopaths, we shouldn't treat those persons with contempt? Child rapists? You can see where I'm going here.

No, it isn't so simple. Some people need to be held accountable to what they say and do and sometimes contempt is the apt response.

It's not that we simply disagree, in other words. We disagree on things that determine life and death of children, rights, the future of civilization. Some ideas are only worthy of contempt, like those I've listed.

After all, we aren't just disagreeing on red and blue here...

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:35:59 UTC | #942672

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 18 by Red Dog

Comment 14 by xsjadolateralus :

Comment 12 by Red Dog :

Comment 7 by strangebrew :

I very much doubt believers would actually risk their soul fraternizing with the 'enemy' in any meaningful way...

In spite of your doubts it already happens all the time and has been happening for a long time. Many of the most dedicated people working for social justice and world peace are "believers" and they work with atheists and agnostics all the time. Some famous examples are Daniel Berrigan and Martin Luther King. I've also personally worked with many believers on these issues and I've often been impressed by their dedication and commitment.

Listen to what you're saying. "These people act so good, it's as if they're hardly religious at all".

Those are your words not mine. What I'm saying is that just because I disagree with someone about religion doesn't mean they are automatically a bad person. I've known atheists that were real aHoles (for a famous example take Ayn Rand) and I've known religious people who were moral, brilliant, beautiful, and very good in bed.

This isn't an avenue we should consider.

Why not? I believe in the values of the Enlightenment. Rational discussion and debate.

I stand firm with PZ and Hitchens, and many others.

I just finished Hitchens book God Is Not Great and I claim him for my side not yours. Of course he was vocal and passionate about his beliefs. I am too. But that doesn't mean that after I debate with someone I can't have a drink with them and treat them civilly. In his book Hitchens was clear that he has many friends and even wives that were religious. He didn't treat them with contempt. He even got married in a church more than once.

And again, it doesn't matter how much "good" you can do with this. Religion may get kids off drugs, help society (doubtful) but it doesn't make it's teachings moral, or it's factual claims true and at the end of the day we WILL ALWAYS HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT.

And what did I say that makes you think I disagree with any of that? My point (and I'm amazed that I even have to make this argument) is that I can disagree with someone on one issue (religion) and still work with them on other issues (world peace, social justice, outlawing torture, protecting the environment) I wonder if you have ever actually spent much time working on any political issues like this? I have. And its hard work and you take all the allies you can get.

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:39:44 UTC | #942673

casaoui-cool's Avatar Comment 19 by casaoui-cool

Comment 16 by xsjadolateralus :

However, its ridiculous to automatically assume that just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue that you treat that person with contempt until they agree with you.

Hypothetical:

Person A thinks person B should die. Person B disagrees and gives reasons. Person A disregards reasons and insists person B should die.

Well, by your standards, we shouldn't treat them with contempt. Nor those who think we should be splattered on pavement, bombed to annihilation, take away child/woman rights, secularism. We shouldn't treat them with contempt.

Psychopaths, we shouldn't treat that person with contempt. Child rapists... You can see where I'm going here.

No, it isn't so simple. Some people need to be held accountable to what they say and do and sometimes contempt is the apt response.

It's not that we simply disagree, in other words. We disagree on things that determine life and death of children, rights, the future of civilization. Some ideas are only worthy of contempt, like those I've listed.

You are making wrong analogies & false comparisons

Besides :

What do you think makes you, of all people, the judge of just that ?

Don't you know that objectivity does not exist , not even at the level of exact sciences,let alone elsewhere ?

What makes you think you can be objective , of all people ?

Don't you think we ,as believers , can judge you the same way you do regarding ourselves ?

Have you ever heard of the golden rule for example ? ...of democracy ? ..of the freedom of belief, of thought, individual freedom , the freedom of speech ....?

Then wat ? should we try to erase each other from this planet or try to work together with each other as way many atheists & belivers already do ?

You do sound like the most religious fanatics ever , ironically enough : they are your best friends ever : you need ech other , you cannot exist without each other , those religious fanatics are the reason you exist as an atheistic fanatic , you love each other , you feed on each other ...

Congratulations for your intolerant destructive words : very 'constructive " positive attitude indeed

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:48:42 UTC | #942674

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 20 by Red Dog

Comment 17 by xsjadolateralus :

Comment 16 by xsjadolateralus :

However, its ridiculous to automatically assume that just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue that you treat that person with contempt until they agree with you.

Hypothetical:

Person A thinks person B should die. Person B disagrees and gives reasons. Person A disregards reasons and insists person B should die.

Well, by your standards, we shouldn't treat person A with contempt. Nor those who think we should be splattered on pavement, bombed to annihilation, take away child/woman rights, secularism. We shouldn't treat them with contempt.

I don't see what that proves. Are you saying that all theists want to kill you? Or all theists want to kill some innocent person? I think one mistake you may be making is to assume that all theists are like Rick Santorum and his followers. They aren't. Again, I've personally worked with theists who are pro-choice, feminists, and work amazingly hard (much more so than I ever have or will) to help make this world a better place.

Psychopaths, we shouldn't treat those persons with contempt? Child rapists? You can see where I'm going here.

No actually I'm not sure where you are going. Are you saying every person who believes in God is psychopath or a child rapist? I assume you see how ridiculous that statement is. So then what are you saying? I'm not talking about psychopaths or child rapists. I'm talking about people like my ex-girl friend who is a concert pianist, and beautiful, and also a born again christian. And... I hope you are sitting down... she is also pro-choice and a feminist and a million times more honest and compassionate than I ever could hope to be.

Grow up. Its comforting to believe that the world is black and white. That anyone who disagrees with you is evil but the real world is seldom that simple.

No, it isn't so simple. Some people need to be held accountable to what they say and do and sometimes contempt is the apt response.

Some theists deserve contempt. Of course. So do some atheists. (Ayn Rand, Joseph Stalin)

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:55:44 UTC | #942675

casaoui-cool's Avatar Comment 21 by casaoui-cool

Comment 15 by Red Dog :

Comment 9 by casaoui-cool :

Comment 6 by Peter Grant : ...

PZ is right. We don't respect their ridiculous beliefs and I don't see why we should to pretend to. When they stop believing nonsense they can join our group, but until they do we will keep ridiculing them. I'd even go so far as to say that we have a moral obligation to do so.

You seem to be totally unaware of the fact that what you were saying was / is the very definition of ...fascism, ironically enough .

Congratulations .

What makes you think you possess or monopolise the truth, buddy ?

Ridiculous pretentious intolerance : science should make you humble, people .

P.S.: I do think, at the other hand , that all beliefs , cultures , thoughtstreams ...do have some elements of truth here & there , to some extent at least ,including the secular or atheistic ones ,so.

Yes, its amazing that people who claim to be dedicated to "critical thinking and evidence-based understanding" can take such intolerant closed minded views.

BTW, I don't personally think that all beliefs have some elements of truth. I think some beliefs such as Christianity are just wrong. However, its ridiculous to automatically assume that just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue that you treat that person with contempt until they agree with you.

Even more than my belief in atheism is my belief in reason. And to have reasonable debates and analysis with others its essential that you treat people with respect even when, especially when, you disagree with them.

Exactly :

I can only agree with you, my friend : very wise words you put there , for us all to reflect on indeed .

It's really amazing to see how many of these kindda self-declared rational atheists behave so irrationally & exclusively ,if not via a fascist way , excluding all non-atheistic thought via these silly undemocratic irrational destructive ways ,unfortunately enough .

Why can't people just let everybodyelse believe in what she/he wanna believe in ?

When are we , humans, gonna stop pretending to possess or monopolize the truth ?

The very simple fact that what we do know is almost nothing compared to what we absolutely do not know & the fact that every single human being seems to have a certain amount of free will, should be reasons enough for us all to be more tolerant with each other , more compassionate ....more nice to each other .....showing our compassion for our mutual ignorance , ......................

Mon, 21 May 2012 20:57:04 UTC | #942676

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 22 by mordacious1

Well, my very christian neighbor and I spent Sunday filling in potholes on our road for the benefit of the other cheap/lazy neighbors. I didn't mention it was the sabbath and he didn't try to pray for the holes to fill themselves. So the job got done without a hitch, except the one in my back.

Mon, 21 May 2012 21:07:27 UTC | #942677

Anonymous's Avatar Comment 23 by Anonymous

Comment Removed by Moderator

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:00:33 UTC | #942683

Sean_W's Avatar Comment 24 by Sean_W

First, where our goals are the same we are working together. That does not mean that we necessarily work under the same banner. I think that is important, and apparently so do theists who have aptly chosen the title Interfaith and invited the faithless to join them.

Second, on those areas where we disagree there is no possibility of working together, explicitly or otherwise. An obvious point, but still something I think that needed to be said.

So, if we work together already where we agree and we needn't do so under the banner of Interfaith, then when focusing on whether or not joining Interfaith efforts is a good thing, we ought perhaps to allow ourselves to be concerned at least a little with our own image. Or at least, having our bases covered, not be guilted into merging with causes managed under banners we detest for "greater goods" which we ourselves already serve.

The more meaningful discussion to be had from this question seems to me to be around whether or not it is best for atheists to disappear under the banner of Interfaith, and if that is what truly happens when atheists choose to work for or with Interfaith organizations.

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:06:41 UTC | #942686

Anonymous's Avatar Comment 25 by Anonymous

Comment Removed by Moderator

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:07:14 UTC | #942688

Peter Grant's Avatar Comment 26 by Peter Grant

Comment 9 by casaoui-cool

You seem to be totally unaware of the fact that what you were saying was / is the very definition of ...fascism, ironically enough .

Hardly, I've never met a funny fascist, they generally seem to lack any sense of humor. Perhaps they take themselves a bit too seriously. Fortunately, this also makes them great targets for ridicule.

Congratulations .

Thank you :D

What makes you think you possess or monopolise the truth, buddy ?

It is precisely those who think they possess some sort of monopoly on truth who should be ridiculed.

Ridiculous pretentious intolerance : science should make you humble, people

LOL, have you met any real scientists? Many are extremely arrogant in their field of expertise, and justifiably so.

P.S.: I do think, at the other hand , that all beliefs , cultures , thoughtstreams ...do have some elements of truth here & there , to some extent at least ,including the secular or atheistic ones ,so.

Sure, why not. The whole "God" thing is still ridiculous though.

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:12:03 UTC | #942690

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 27 by Red Dog

Comment 23 by xsjadolateralus :

Comment 20 by Red Dog :

Comment 17 by xsjadolateralus :

Comment 16 by xsjadolateralus :

However, its ridiculous to automatically assume that just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue that you treat that person with contempt until they agree with you.

Hypothetical:

Person A thinks person B should die. Person B disagrees and gives reasons. Person A disregards reasons and insists person B should die.

Well, by your standards, we shouldn't treat person A with contempt. Nor those who think we should be splattered on pavement, bombed to annihilation, take away child/woman rights, secularism. We shouldn't treat them with contempt.

I don't see what that proves. Are you saying that all theists want to kill you? Or all theists want to kill some innocent person? I think one mistake you may be making is to assume that all theists are like Rick Santorum and his followers. They aren't. Again, I've personally worked with theists who are pro-choice, feminists, and work amazingly hard (much more so than I ever have or will) to help make this world a better place.

Psychopaths, we shouldn't treat those persons with contempt? Child rapists? You can see where I'm going here.

No actually I'm not sure where you are going. Are you saying every person who believes in God is psychopath or a child rapist? I assume you see how ridiculous that statement is. So then what are you saying? I'm not talking about psychopaths or child rapists. I'm talking about people like my ex-girl friend who is a concert pianist, and beautiful, and also a born again christian. And... I hope you are sitting down... she is also pro-choice and a feminist and a million times more honest and compassionate than I ever could hope to be.

Grow up. Its comforting to believe that the world is black and white. That anyone who disagrees with you is evil but the real world is seldom that simple.

No, it isn't so simple. Some people need to be held accountable to what they say and do and sometimes contempt is the apt response.

Some theists deserve contempt. Of course. So do some atheists. (Ayn Rand, Joseph Stalin)

And you're an idiot...

Wow, way to gracefully DANCE around everything I said.

"What, what are you saying, huh, all theists are psychopaths, what"

You are more dense than bank vault walls.

The last refuge of someone who can't use reason, start throwing out insults. I responded to each of your arguments with a rational response. You ignored my rational arguments and just insult me.

First off, I said "A hypothetical", secondly, of course I wasn't saying all theists are psychopaths or want to kill me. That would be your idiotic translation of what I said.

I was using an analogy, a thought experiment to prove my point.

I was asking an honest question. I realized it was a hypothetical question and I didn't think you meant that all theists were psychopaths. That's why I said "I assume you see how ridiculous that statement is." I truly did not and still don't see what the point of your statement was. Of course psychopaths and child rapists are bad. But as you agree all theists aren't child rapists or psychopaths so what does your original statement about psychopaths and child molesters have to do with a general discussion about whether its possible for atheists to ever work with theists? (I.e. work with the theists that aren't child rapists and psycopaths)

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:15:43 UTC | #942691

xsjadolateralus's Avatar Comment 28 by xsjadolateralus

Comment 21 by casaoui-cool :

Comment 15 by Red Dog :

Comment 9 by casaoui-cool :

Comment 6 by Peter Grant : ...

PZ is right. We don't respect their ridiculous beliefs and I don't see why we should to pretend to. When they stop believing nonsense they can join our group, but until they do we will keep ridiculing them. I'd even go so far as to say that we have a moral obligation to do so.

You seem to be totally unaware of the fact that what you were saying was / is the very definition of ...fascism, ironically enough .

Congratulations .

What makes you think you possess or monopolise the truth, buddy ?

Ridiculous pretentious intolerance : science should make you humble, people .

P.S.: I do think, at the other hand , that all beliefs , cultures , thoughtstreams ...do have some elements of truth here & there , to some extent at least ,including the secular or atheistic ones ,so.

Yes, its amazing that people who claim to be dedicated to "critical thinking and evidence-based understanding" can take such intolerant closed minded views.

BTW, I don't personally think that all beliefs have some elements of truth. I think some beliefs such as Christianity are just wrong. However, its ridiculous to automatically assume that just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue that you treat that person with contempt until they agree with you.

Even more than my belief in atheism is my belief in reason. And to have reasonable debates and analysis with others its essential that you treat people with respect even when, especially when, you disagree with them.

Exactly :

I can only agree with you, my friend : very wise words you put there , for us all to reflect on indeed .

It's really amazing to see how many of these kindda self-declared rational atheists behave so irrationally & exclusively ,if not via a fascist way , excluding all non-atheistic thought via these silly undemocratic irrational destructive ways ,unfortunately enough .

Why can't people just let everybodyelse believe in what she/he wanna believe in ?

When are we , humans, gonna stop pretending to possess or monopolize the truth ?

The very simple fact that what we do know is almost nothing compared to what we absolutely do not know & the fact that every single human being seems to have a certain amount of free will, should be reasons enough for us all to be more tolerant with each other , more compassionate ....more nice to each other .....showing our compassion for our mutual ignorance , ......................

Besides the obvious fluff of your comment, you are naive to think you know how much we don't know. I'm sick of this being abused. We know quite a bit and the things we know lead us to discount certain beliefs, especially those which are harmful. LIKE, the belief that sweating in a blanket for 48 hours is going to do anything but kill you... These are just beliefs and if the world were left up to people with such soft heads like you, we would probably be extinct.

Sorry, the belief that children are sexy and should have sex with older men is a belief that is WORTH denouncing and DEFENDING against. Just like the idea that all infidels should die. These are beliefs.

Sorry, you can't live in a world where we simply respect everyone's beliefs. For one, that isn't what is really going on. What religious people want is the right to act on their beliefs, to bully children and women, etc.

You can't simply say "it's okay to believe that all Jews must die and I'm Okay with this and not combating it is enlightened"

No, not all beliefs, opinions or thoughts are equal and sometimes they're downright disgusting and need to be denounced. Religion falls easily within this criteria and it's every humanists duty to denounce, ridicule and otherwise combat such disgusting ideas.

I could care less if your naive spouse is born again and finds time to donate to the good will. I could care less if you think everyone has an opinion worthy of protecting.

We need to make a crystal clear distinction between belief and thought. You can THINK anything you like, but when you say you BELIEVE it. It means that you are asserting it as TRUE and it's what you consider reality.

We don't allow people who believe in murder and go about practicing it to continue to do so. We disagree with their beliefs and rightly lock them away. In the same sense, many religious people think it's okay to murder in the guise of combat, or that beating children to death is sometimes okay, or that burning witches is a great way to purify the human population, exorcism, thousands of wicked, horrible things that BY BEING A CHRISTIAN YOU ARE DELIBERATELY IGNORING AND CONTRIBUTING TO.

Just like it's not okay to think that jesus is an effective sacrifice, thus liberating you from the responsibility of consequences of your actions. That's immoral and I will live my life trying to raise consciousness through contempt, comedy, ridicule and every single skill of persuasion I can muster.

Yes, christians, from the start, are worthy of contempt. They are ignorant, naive and enabling suffering.

You lose.

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:25:55 UTC | #942692

Red Dog's Avatar Comment 29 by Red Dog

Comment 21 by casaoui-cool :

...

Even more than my belief in atheism is my belief in reason. And to have reasonable debates and analysis with others its essential that you treat people with respect even when, especially when, you disagree with them.

Exactly :

I can only agree with you, my friend : very wise words you put there , for us all to reflect on indeed .

Thanks.

It's really amazing to see how many of these kindda self-declared rational atheists behave so irrationally & exclusively ,if not via a fascist way , excluding all non-atheistic thought via these silly undemocratic irrational destructive ways ,unfortunately enough .

Why can't people just let everybodyelse believe in what she/he wanna believe in ?

When are we , humans, gonna stop pretending to possess or monopolize the truth ?

The very simple fact that what we do know is almost nothing compared to what we absolutely do not know & the fact that every single human being seems to have a certain amount of free will, should be reasons enough for us all to be more tolerant with each other , more compassionate ....more nice to each other .....showing our compassion for our mutual ignorance , ......................

I agree. Socrates is one of my favorite philosophers and that is essentially what he said, the starting point for true knowledge and for a moral life is realizing how little we really know about the world around us.

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:29:07 UTC | #942695

Anonymous's Avatar Comment 30 by Anonymous

Comment Removed by Moderator

Mon, 21 May 2012 22:29:29 UTC | #942696