Atheists - why do you care?

Pat Mustard

First post on this forum. Please excuse if this has been done before. Have searched boards before posting.

Mods, if this should be moved to After Hours, then please move it. However, I thought that this would be the most appropriate forum.

Bear with me on this, for a moment. I'm not very well read on this subject, as it does not usually interest me. I was asked about it recently, and it piqued my interest, somwwhat.

Cards on table: I regard myself as a skeptic. I think that is enough for the purposes of this discussion.

I think of theism as a harmless and/or beneficial belief. I understand about the wars in the name of Allah, God, etc. None of that affects me here in Ireland. I understand about oppression by the Catholic Church in Ireland. I'm inclined to think that the separation of Church and State is a work in progress, and that we have moved on rather a lot over the previous 60 years.

From what I've read, people who believe in a God are generally happier and live longer. It must be a pretty comforting to believe in a benevolent higher power; a being who has made a plan for you, even if you haven't bothered to make one of your own. I don't see the reasoning, but I understand the comfort.

At the same time, I see that some theists wish to evangelise. They want to spread the good news, etc. I can see why one would want to spread good news. The people who mapped the human genome didn't keep that to themselves. I expect that the people at CERN will broadcast their findings concerning the possibility that the Higgs particle was discovered last year. Before the obvious is pointed out to me, I understand that there is no scientific proof of the existence of any God, but that the mapping of the himan genome has been proved.

What I do not understand is why atheists feel the need to preach what they believe. I just think that there's no point. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained from engaging theists in conversation on the subject. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained in convincing someone of the non-existence of God.

At the risk of using a possibly condescending yet hopefully apt cliché, I think it's like telling a child that there's no Santa Claus. I still remember that sad school day, long ago, when another seven year old classmate told me that. I was simply unable to convince myself that what I had heard was not true, but there's no going back once you're through the looking glass.

My question boils down to this: If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

Insect Overlord

Hmmm, I don't think I've ever seen this question asked here before...

OP, did you try using the search function at all to see if this had already been done?

Pat Mustard

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Hmmm, I don't think I've ever seen this question asked here before...

OP, did you try using the search function at all to see if this had already been done?

I searched before I posted. Have I missed something?

Insect Overlord

The Mustard wrote: »

I searched before I posted. Have I missed something?

I may have confused myself. Sorry! This question has come up loads of times in After Hours. That's the forum I thought I was still reading.

Pat Mustard

Ah f*ck it. I can't understand why I didn't find it. Still haven't.

Sarky

Nothing wrong with trying to tell them about the plank in their eye, if they'd shut up for a minute about the splinter in someone else's.

Generally it's the theists who engage others in conversation about it. In all fairness, when's the last time you were harassed by door-to-door atheists, or some old guy from the sticks drawling his thick Longford accent through a megaphone on O'Connell street about how there is no god?

We'd just like to be left alone, for the most part. But religion has this thing about butting into peoples' lives...

Insect Overlord

The Mustard wrote: »

Ah f*ck it. I can't understand why I didn't find it. Still haven't.

Actually, it looks like I wasn't getting confused with AH after all.

Here's one: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=67670074
And another: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=58250079
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74474392
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68751986
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68284414
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=58812354
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=67898879
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=57446056

I think these are all different threads, a nice little sample going back over the last few years.

Pat Mustard

I must have a read of those so.

I guess I shoulda searched properly for those threads, rather than a cursory check to see whether it had been done before.

condra

I'm a bolshy, confrontational, arrogant git of an atheist at the best of times.

Might be something to do with the fact that I wasn't raised an atheist, but lost my faith quite brutally through a number of personal tragedies, some soul searching, and more than a few books and videos.

I think it's reasonable to expect that someone might be angry when they discover that they have been lied to about the nature of reality ever since they were born.

Insect Overlord

The Mustard wrote: »

I guess I shoulda searched properly for those threads, rather than a cursory check to see whether it had been done before.

I had a look back through the last 6 or 7 pages myself before I went to the search-box. It hasn't actually been brought up too recently, to be fair to you.

I really shouldn't post here this late at night. >_<

Pat Mustard

condra wrote: »

I'm a bolshy, confrontational, arrogant git of an atheist at the best of times.

Might be something to do with the fact that I wasn't raised an atheist, but lost my faith quite brutally through a number of personal tragedies, some soul searching, and more than a few books and videos.

I think it's reasonable to expect that someone might be angry when they discover that they have been lied to about the nature of reality ever since they were born.

On reading your post, the emotion is almost palpable.

The thing is, I don't care (about atheism), not really. I can't understand why people do, not in this day and age.

I used to believe. And I wanted to believe. And I became agnostic. And then, over time, I just couldn't believe anymore. Not because of some critical event. Just because there is no reason to believe. No proof. No convincing evidence. Undramatic, isn't it?

Pat Mustard

Insect Overlord wrote: »

I really shouldn't post here this late at night. >_<

Am I likely to attract an angry mob of drunks?

Sarky

Probably not angry :pac:

Chuck Stone

The Mustard wrote: »

I can see why one would want to spread good news

Hmmm...

If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

Grumble.

condra

The Mustard wrote: »

On reading your post, the emotion is almost palpable.

Not emotional at all. Just hamming it up a bit.

The thing is, I don't care (about atheism), not really. I can't understand why people do, not in this day and age.

Yes, you've mentioned that...

I used to believe. And I wanted to believe. And I became agnostic. And then, over time, I just couldn't believe anymore. Not because of some critical event. Just because there is no reason to believe. No proof. No convincing evidence. Undramatic, isn't it?

Yes.. your personal story is undramatic...

.. and?

I'm not sure what your question is. Apparently you can't understand why people aren't more like you.

Pat Mustard

condra wrote: »

Not emotional at all. Just hamming it up a bit.

Ah, I see. I was not trying to criticise you or your post. Seems my observation was incorrect.

condra wrote: »

Yes.. your personal story is undramatic...

.. and?

I mentioned it by way of contrast to how you came to the same conclusion.

condra wrote: »

Apparently you can't understand why people aren't more like you.

There is an element of that.

Pat Mustard

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Hmmm...



Grumble.

OK, Chuck Stone, but I think it's more like harsh reality than welcome news.

Sycopat

I'm going to rearrange your post a bit to give an answer:

The Mustard wrote: »

What I do not understand is why atheists feel the need to preach what they believe.

The Mustard wrote: »

I can see why one would want to spread good news.

Atheism is very liberating for a lot of people.

This might amaze you, but the lack of a sky-tyrant overlord slave master, willing to damn you to eternal torment for being born in a way he designed you to be can be comforting to people.

Simultaneously, you claim you can understand why scientists want to share their findings, but what about scientists whose findings disagree with holy texts. Which happens repeatedly in biology, geology, medicine and physics. Should they be silent on their findings because it might disabuse the ignorant of their preconceptions?

As atheism is 'good news' to many people, why should they not spread it? After all they are only trying to bring the same comfort to the lives of others... Just like those religious people claim to be.

Also when you don't believe in a god it's very easy to start seeing religion as a scam. They take money in return for offering comforting lies. So some atheists will see it as a moral prerogative to promote atheism.

In my case, I don't particularly care. I will discuss atheism and religion happily, but I don't seek out arguments. I am an atheist, it's part of who I am, but it's not a particularly important part to me, it's more a logical conclusion of my outlook on life.

ShooterSF

Misconception #1 is that atheism is a harsh reality. Atheism is hugely liberating, no longer do I have to feel guilt about my impulses or my actions unless they actually affect others. My teenage years were horrible partially because of the internal conflict between trying to be "Good" in a religious sense and my impulses and it still messes with me over a decade later at times until I remind myself that it's all bollox. I don't fear hell or such either for not living my life to a horrible set
of demands.

So yes I will voice my opinion or my belief on the subject when it comes up because I think it's better for people. Even still I won't go knocking door to door because I respect people's right to privacy and their own views more than many religious people do who feel the same way about their way of life.

This is not limited to my atheism btw, if people start up discussions about psychics, astrologists, nutritionists, mediums, homeopaths, chiropractors, reiki eh folks or any other things I consider fake I'll voice my opinion there too, not just because I think they are better off without them but because I believe people want to find the truth as much as I do and despise scams of all shapes and sizes.

Shenshen

The Mustard wrote: »

What I do not understand is why atheists feel the need to preach what they believe. I just think that there's no point. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained from engaging theists in conversation on the subject. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained in convincing someone of the non-existence of God.

At the risk of using a possibly condescending yet hopefully apt cliché, I think it's like telling a child that there's no Santa Claus. I still remember that sad school day, long ago, when another seven year old classmate told me that. I was simply unable to convince myself that what I had heard was not true, but there's no going back once you're through the looking glass.

My question boils down to this: If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

Well. how many atheists have you heard preaching so far?

I've had my door-bell rung by Jehova's Witnesses trying to flog their Watchtowers, by friendly if spotty men in black revealing themselves to be Mormons, by elderly ladies enquiring if they might put a statue of the virgin Mary up in my front room so I could serve the neighbourhood sandwiches while everyone prayed a bit, and most recently had a leaflet put through the letterbox wishing to inform me about the truth about Islam (apparently, it's really really all about peace).

I have yet to open the door and find someone there wishing to discuss the absence of a deity, while handing me a leaflet with quotes from Dawkins and Hitchens. And, to be honest, I'm not holding my breath either.

The most preachy thing atheists seem to be doing is asking to be treated equal, and giving people access to information about the idea of atheism by writing and publishing books and articles.
And if people don't want to know about it, they are free to not buy those books or not read those articles...

swampgas

The Mustard wrote: »

First post on this forum.

Welcome

My question boils down to this: If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

Speaking for myself, I don't push my beliefs on other people, however there are situations where it is often assumed by other people that I am a Catholic/Christian and I prefer to make it clear that I am not. If this leads to a discussion I tend to say why *I* believe what I do, rather than why *they* should believe the same.

However religion is still pervasive in Ireland. The angelus on the radio and prayers in the Dáil are trivial examples, more serious is the pretty much compulsory exposure to intense Catholic indoctrination in most of our primary schools. Acceptance of this state of affairs is due in no small measure to the millions of cultural catholics who think a bit of religion is harmless. Maybe it's no wonder some of us might want to challenge their presumption?

It's surprising we're not a lot more bolshy, to be honest.

Obliq

Shenshen wrote: »

The most preachy thing atheists seem to be doing is asking to be treated equal.

Exactly. And I've found that to be the only common ground among atheists. There's no manifesto to "spread the word", no mission to direct others away from whatever belief they hold, UNLESS their belief has an impact on people's lives (whether you believe in a sky-pilot or not).

The only reason I'm up here on A&A discussing topics is to become better educated about the ways religion impacts on people's lives, and where that has a negative impact, I like to discuss ways that could be changed if possible. Same for why I'm supporting Atheist Ireland. It's important to me personally that other people's beliefs don't have a negative impact on my life as an atheist, and I take a wider view on that too - it is important to me that inequality in the world is tackled head-on where possible. Much of that inequality is due to religious "morality" having great power in any given country.

Discussing that is not preaching. Finding other people who feel the same way is nice too.

nozzferrahhtoo

The Mustard wrote: »

If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

I think the answer for me is four fold.

1) I engage such people not to change their minds but my own. Engaging with people who disagree with you on a topic is the best way to learn more about that topic and update and refine your own knowledge and arguments.

2) I also engage such people not to change their minds but to ensure the counter arguments and opinions are present where theirs are for anyone ELSE who may be reading what I write. I do not entertain much hope or desire to change the mind of the person I am engaging with.

3) One of the best attacks one can do with charlatans is to keep them talking. Some of the opinions of the theists who post around here are so comical and/or absurd and/or abhorrent that the best thing to do is keep them talking and let them hang themselves.

4) I believe discourse is the most important single thing our species has available to it and it creates a natural arena of ideas which compete against each other with a kind of selection and evolution process occurring. I merely want to add my voice and ideas to that gene pool and let whatever happens to them happen.

In summary: What I do and write on the subject of religion has very little at all with the person I am actually directly addressing at any given time.

Dades

Welcome, Mustard.

Yes this has been asked before but, hey, what hasn't?

The Mustard wrote: »

My question boils down to this: If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

Firstly, have you experienced a lot of atheists trying to convert people? Certainly people on this forum don't go on about atheism all the time outside of this forum, and the general feeling is that unless someone else brings it up, religion is a personal matter.

Secondly, let me give you an example. I'm an atheist. In order to get my daughter into my local (taxpayer-funded, oversubscribed) school, she must be baptised a catholic. No doubt about it. If she isn't officially a catholic, she's not getting in, and a baptised child who lives further from the school than we do, is.

If you, like me, think this is unfair, then now you see why the non-religious are starting speak out (and make the religious uncomfortable). Not to convert people - but to request not to be discriminated against in their own country.

Sarky

Dades wrote: »

Yes this has been asked before but, hey, what hasn't?

Do you reckon John Waters can deep throat?

If that has been asked before I shall be genuinely surprised.

Delirium

Sarky wrote: »

Do you reckon John Waters can deep throat?

:eek::eek:

robindch

The Mustard wrote: »

I think of theism as a harmless and/or beneficial belief.

You'll find that most posters here in A+A disagree with that. My own position is that theism, at an individual level, is delusional and dishonest and frequently dreadfully anti-social. At a societal level, religion is an unmitigated disaster.

The Mustard wrote: »

From what I've read, people who believe in a God are generally happier and live longer.

Some claim to be. I rather doubt it though and think that the levels are fairly similar.

The Mustard wrote: »

At the same time, I see that some theists wish to evangelise. They want to spread the good news, etc. I can see why one would want to spread good news. [...] My question boils down to this: If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

Religions are memes which evolve tactics and strategies to ensure their own survival. One of the most effective ways to survive, as a meme, is to develop social strategies to enforce transmission -- hence the religious control of things like schools (filled with minds that are vulnerable because they're young and trusting) and hospitals (filled with minds that are vulnerable because they're sick) and so on.

A lot can be written on how religions work, and a lot of that is quite interesting. Some of it is here, though the site is quite outdated now:

http://www.christianitymeme.org/

Enjoy!

Galvasean

The Mustard wrote: »

What I do not understand is why atheists feel the need to preach what they believe.

There would be no need for atheists to be vocal if religious people would keep themselves to themselves. Instead religious people continuously lobby the Government looking to have the country shaped in terms of their own ideology.
When over 90% of primary schools in the country are run according to a Catholic 'ethos' which apparently overrides the nation's anti-discrimination laws in relation to children we have a problem.
When important matters of law and State are being swayed by various groups of religious persuasion we have a problem. Just look at the X-case fiasco. That should have been done and dusted decades ago, but lingers on due to religious interference.
When gay people's rights are being denied by religious lobby groups we have a problem.
When terminally ill people of sound mind are denied the option to end their painful lives in a dignified manner of their own choosing because other people think their God doesn't want it to happen - we have a problem.
When high ranking officials of popular religions preach to the masses that atheists are 'not fully human' we have a problem.
When you can't walk down the street without having religious people blocking your path and handing you literature on why you are hell-bound or yelling at you via a megaphone - we have a problem.
When religious people knock at your door unsolicited trying to convert you or cram all sorts of literature and propaganda newspapers - we have a problem.

And apparently it is the atheists who are the 'preachy' ones? Pull the other one :rolleyes:
It is actually quite surprising that atheists are so tolerant of the crap they get from various religious folk.
But hey, what's the harm right?

Sarky

koth wrote: »

:eek::eek:

Well, he's already posed naked like some wanton hussy. Thin end of the wedge tbh. Combined with the death of printed media, it's only a matter of time before he's degrading himself in front of Japanese businessmen for cash.

Zillah

Mostly because the idea that religion is harmless and makes people feel nice is a total illusion, actively and disingenuously fostered by those in positions of power due to religion.

Most of the people that claim religion helps them, that it answers questions and solves existential turmoil, only think so because religion fostered those very vulnerabilities in the first place. We are taught that going to hell is likely, so we feel saved by Jesus. We are taught that we are dirty and wrong for natural desires, so we feel pure when we repress them and confess to an authority figure. We are taught that we must live up to standards that are literally impossible: Love everyone, never feel anger, jealously, desire or pride. We are made to feel like failures for being human, and that only they can save us. So we submit, and feel saved.

It is a scam. I see no difference between an old lady saying the rosary and feeling protected by Jesus and a member of a newer cult that insists The Leader helps her know herself. Religion is a self fulfilling prophecy. Imagine if that lady had never had a fear of death and shame of human nature cultivated in her in the first place?

Secondly, religion has a horrendous effect on society in general. Just look at attitudes towards gay people, transgendered people, abortion, stem cells etc. At the heart of almost every short-sighted and reactionary opposition to a harmless or wonderful thing, there is religion, stridently demanding that the faithful resist the march of progress for their own selfish or insane reasons.

I've posted variations of this about ten times now, but I don't think there is any point lambasting the OP for repeating a thread - it is a discussion forum and if we snapped at people for repeating something every time it happened then we'd have nothing but an endless chain of threads where we savage newcomers.

pauldla

Sarky wrote: »

Well, he's already posed naked like some wanton hussy. Thin end of the wedge tbh. Combined with the death of printed media, it's only a matter of time before he's degrading himself in front of Japanese businessmen for cash.

Is that what that photo was, over on the other thread? A picture of John Waters in the nip? I couldn't see it here.

Wow, for once I'm grateful for the Great Firewall of China.

Obliq

pauldla wrote: »

Is that what that photo was, over on the other thread? A picture of John Waters in the nip? I couldn't see it here.

Wow, for once I'm grateful for the Great Firewall of China.

Yes, you can be thankful for small mercies. Although I didn't HAVE to look. :eek:

kylith

I have been preached at by Catholics, Protestants and Mormons. I've been told that I'm a sinner and I'm going to hell, and I've been told all that from the day I was born. No atheist has ever said anything to me other than 'I don't belive in gods, and it's ok if you don't either'.

As others have said, the reason why atheists are having to get more vocal is to get some basic rights to education which religious people would like to deny us unless we sign up with them.

pH

The Mustard wrote: »

What I do not understand is why atheists feel the need to preach what they believe. I just think that there's no point. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained from engaging theists in conversation on the subject. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained in convincing someone of the non-existence of God.

I've no idea why you think this is true? Where are you encountering this "preaching"? In public spaces? In schools? Is there an organisation out there trying to convert people away from their religious beliefs?

Take an organisation like Atheist Ireland - nearly everything they do is looking for fairness and equality for those in Ireland who don't believe - trying to loosen the church's grip on our society - hardly anything is "preaching" or aimed at telling believers there's no god, or has a goal of deconverting them.

At the risk of using a possibly condescending yet hopefully apt cliché, I think it's like telling a child that there's no Santa Claus. I still remember that sad school day, long ago, when another seven year old classmate told me that. I was simply unable to convince myself that what I had heard was not true, but there's no going back once you're through the looking glass.

I have no idea what type of speech/books/TV you think is being made that shouldn't be. I know no one who thinks that there should be an atheism program inflicted on primary school children where they're daily bombarded with stories about there being no God.

My question boils down to this: If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

I'm sorry who is telling them?

oldrnwisr

The Mustard wrote: »

I think of theism as a harmless and/or beneficial belief. I understand about the wars in the name of Allah, God, etc. None of that affects me here in Ireland. I understand about oppression by the Catholic Church in Ireland. I'm inclined to think that the separation of Church and State is a work in progress, and that we have moved on rather a lot over the previous 60 years.

If we're talking about theism and theism alone then I'll grant you harmless, beneficial, not a chance. However, there aren't that many people out there who are vanilla theists, usually it's some flavour of theism like Christianity or Islam. Once that happens harmlessness evaporates. It's not just holy wars, the real and detrimental effects of belief can be felt in this country too, it just depends on who you are. We have vocal opposition from the Church and religious organisations regarding same-sex marriage and abortion, discrimination against non-religious people in education and many other facets of life where the Church has needlessly interfered. The only reason we have seen progress in the last 60 years is that the influence of the Church has been steadily eroded and opposed.

The Mustard wrote: »

From what I've read, people who believe in a God are generally happier and live longer. It must be a pretty comforting to believe in a benevolent higher power; a being who has made a plan for you, even if you haven't bothered to make one of your own. I don't see the reasoning, but I understand the comfort.

Even if the section in bold were true, so what? What's important is whether or not these beliefs are true, not whether or not they offer comfort.

The Mustard wrote: »

What I do not understand is why atheists feel the need to preach what they believe. I just think that there's no point. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained from engaging theists in conversation on the subject. In my opinion, there is nothing to be gained in convincing someone of the non-existence of God.

For the most part we don't. Other than outlets like Boards, I only respond to challenges from theists rather than proactively talking about my atheism. However, even in the case of people like Richard Dawkins, it's not really fair to call what he does proselytism or evangelism. There is no positive claim to be made regarding atheism. We are not proposing some alternate set of beliefs to rival those of established religions. Rather people like Dawkins are challenging what they see as the falsehoods being promulgated by religious groups with the intention of converting non-believers. Those of us who engage in this behaviour either here on Boards or in public are simply attempting to refute the baseless claims of theists lest some innocent soul be taken in by their bullcrap, personally speaking.

The Mustard wrote: »

My question boils down to this: If people can't see it for themselves, why bother telling them, when they clearly do not want to know?

Because it's not a matter of intelligence or comprehension, rather one of knowledge. Like it or not, there are a great many people out there who follow the religion that they do simply because their parents did. They have put no thought or effort into questioning or even understanding the beliefs that they purport to hold. As other posters have said, losing your faith can be a liberating experience, why would you not want to share that?

Pat Mustard

Thanks for all replies in a topic which has clearly been analysed in detail several times previously. Due to the number of replies, I am going to simply respond to one post, but hopefully my response will be adequate.

A number of posters have asked me whether I have come across many atheists preaching. No, I have not. In fact, apart from Mormons and maybe Jehova's Witnesses, I have rarely come across anybody trying to preach to me at all. On the few occasions that it has happened, it has been after a quantity of alcohol with friends or family members, who were a little preachy at the time. Although I have rarely witnessed conversations where there was a preachy atheist stranger, I have seen it and I could not understand the object of it.

oldrnwisr wrote: »

If we're talking about theism and theism alone then I'll grant you harmless, beneficial, not a chance. However, there aren't that many people out there who are vanilla theists, usually it's some flavour of theism like Christianity or Islam. Once that happens harmlessness evaporates. It's not just holy wars, the real and detrimental effects of belief can be felt in this country too, it just depends on who you are. We have vocal opposition from the Church and religious organisations regarding same-sex marriage and abortion, discrimination against non-religious people in education and many other facets of life where the Church has needlessly interfered. The only reason we have seen progress in the last 60 years is that the influence of the Church has been steadily eroded and opposed.

I agree with much of what you write.

However, I believe that there are many of those who practise as (a la carte, perhaps) Catholics, who support many of the beliefs and rights of those who the Catholic Church would seek to oppress.

I think that most Catholics accept that their own church has committed grave wrongs. I know Catholics that have protested within their own church, calling for change, calling for public disclosures of wrongs. And I know that they retaliated when they were ignored. I wouldn't like to go into further detail on that, at the slim risk of identifying anyone.

I would accept that Catholic dogma has had a profound impact upon our society, much of it wantonly ultra-conservative and negative.

I would also accept that most of the improvements in the position over the past 60 years have come about due to opposition to the position of the Church.

I would draw a distinction between the belief in God held by a measured, reasonable, just Catholic who aspires to a fair society for all, and the hellfire, brimstone and abuse brought about by the domination of the Catholic Church for more than two millenia.

I know quite a few Catholics who I would regard as being measured, reasonable, just and fair, especially when it comes to people's rights and what those rights should be.

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Even if the section in bold were true, so what? What's important is whether or not these beliefs are true, not whether or not they offer comfort.

It was the crux of my initial post. I think that the comfort of the belief is what makes those people cling to it. Although I agree that organised religion is generally bad, I have no difficulty with an individual holding a belief in a God. Again, I can see how Catholic dogma is objectionable in many areas.

oldrnwisr wrote: »

For the most part we don't. Other than outlets like Boards, I only respond to challenges from theists rather than proactively talking about my atheism. However, even in the case of people like Richard Dawkins, it's not really fair to call what he does proselytism or evangelism. There is no positive claim to be made regarding atheism. We are not proposing some alternate set of beliefs to rival those of established religions. Rather people like Dawkins are challenging what they see as the falsehoods being promulgated by religious groups with the intention of converting non-believers. Those of us who engage in this behaviour either here on Boards or in public are simply attempting to refute the baseless claims of theists lest some innocent soul be taken in by their bullcrap, personally speaking.

Again, I agree with most of what you write, except with regard to Dawkins. I find him to be about as preachy as possible.

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Because it's not a matter of intelligence or comprehension, rather one of knowledge. Like it or not, there are a great many people out there who follow the religion that they do simply because their parents did. They have put no thought or effort into questioning or even understanding the beliefs that they purport to hold.

I can understand this. Thank you.

oldrnwisr wrote: »

As other posters have said, losing your faith can be a liberating experience, why would you not want to share that?

Personally, I found it about as liberating as losing my car keys. Not trying to be smart, but I found it an unpleasant experience. None of my other core beliefs changed in any way. I gained nothing.

ShooterSF

The Mustard wrote: »

Personally, I found it about as liberating as losing my car keys. Not trying to be smart, but I found it an unpleasant experience. None of my other core beliefs changed in any way. I gained nothing.

Just on this, you must have had very little belief in the teachings of any religion before hand if that is true. It would help you understand oldrnwsr's point if you are aware that not everyone has or had a similar experience. It's very easy to see why going from believing what the catholic church teaches about sin and punishment to not is a liberating experience. I'd never want to be a believer again and one of my biggest fears is my brain malfunctioning and drawing me back in at some point.

Pat Mustard

ShooterSF wrote: »

Just on this, you must have had very little belief in the teachings of any religion before hand if that is true.

That's not so. I once believed in a benevolent, non-interventionist God; the kind of guy who helps those who help themselves. I now believe that prayer is like self-hypnosis, galvanising people to pursue their true goals and ambitions.

ShooterSF wrote: »

It would help you understand oldrnwsr's point if you are aware that not everyone has or had a similar experience.

Yes, you are right. I have never had any interest in anyone else's theist/atheist beliefs, until recently. There has been an element of self-blinkering.

ShooterSF wrote: »

It's very easy to see why going from believing what the catholic church teaches about sin and punishment to not is a liberating experience.

Maybe. I can't see it. I guess I chose to believe certain things and those which I didn't like to believe, I simply didn't. It was more of an inevitable conclusion than any sort of leap in understanding.

ShooterSF wrote: »

I'd never want to be a believer again and one of my biggest fears is my brain malfunctioning and drawing me back in at some point.

condra

The Mustard, I'm not so sure that so many atheists actually "care" so much anyway. Certainly in this bloody awesome corner of the internet, (A&A) we identify as atheists but apparently spend more time talking about science, religion and ethics, than we do actually being evangelical.

If you're looking for some truly dogmatic, evangelical atheism, "Atheism+" might be more up your street, or its nearest Irish equivalent, "Atheist Ireland".
http://www.facebook.com/groups/atheistireland/

I guarentee the responses to your "why do you care" question would be more than a little frosty in those circles compared to this forum.

Pat Mustard

condra wrote: »

The Mustard, I'm not so sure that so many atheists actually "care" so much anyway. Certainly in this bloody awesome corner of the internet, (A&A) we identify as atheists but apparently spend more time talking about science, religion and ethics, than we do actually being evangelical.

If you're looking for some truly dogmatic, evangelical atheism, "Atheism+" might be more up your street, or its nearest Irish equivalent, "Atheist Ireland".
http://www.facebook.com/groups/atheistireland/

I guarentee the responses to your "why do you care" question would be more than a little frosty in those circles compared to this forum.

Very good! In fact, I was pleasantly surprised with the reasonable, patient, and engaging replies that I received in this forum.

I had thought that it might be an emotive topic for some.

Obliq

condra wrote: »

I guarentee the responses to your "why do you care" question would be more than a little frosty in those circles compared to this forum.

Don't you mean less moderate?

Naz_st

Christopher Hitchens put it well when asked "Why don't you keep your atheism to yourself?": "Because the religious won't allow me to; because every time I open the paper there's another instance of theocratic encroachment on free society"

Bannasidhe

The Mustard wrote: »

Very good! In fact, I was pleasantly surprised with the reasonable, patient, and engaging replies that I received in this forum.

I had thought that it might be an emotive topic for some.

I only get emotive when someone tried to push their religious beliefs on me or mine - then I push back.

Sadly, in Ireland that requires a lot of pushing - but I used to be a prop forward so I'm well used to shoving back when the pressure builds.

ShooterSF

The Mustard wrote: »

That's not so. I once believed in a benevolent, non-interventionist God; the kind of guy who helps those who help themselves. I now believe that prayer is like self-hypnosis, galvanising people to pursue their true goals and ambitions.

To be fair I did mean religions like christianity, islam etc. when I said "you must have had very little belief in the teachings of any religion" but I do find it funny, if you dont mind me saying, that your own private religion had both a non-interventionist god and one that helps people thereby continuing religions contradictory nature

Maybe. I can't see it. I guess I chose to believe certain things and those which I didn't like to believe, I simply didn't. It was more of an inevitable conclusion than any sort of leap in understanding.

Lucky you! I believed stuff, horrible stuff about "impure" thoughts and desires and was often miserable and frightened because of it.

I smile too but our personality is part of our brains and if I had an accident that damaged or affected it I could start believing it again and that really is scary

Pat Mustard

ShooterSF wrote: »

To be fair I did mean religions like christianity, islam etc. when I said "you must have had very little belief in the teachings of any religion" but I do find it funny, if you dont mind me saying, that your own private religion had both a non-interventionist god and one that helps people thereby continuing religions contradictory nature

I was raised a Catholic, but I was also raised to think for myself. When devout Catholic parents tell their 5 year old that Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden was just a parable, then that five year old is going to wonder what else is parable and to be taken with a pinch of salt. Plus, even schoolchildren raise questions when they are told about a loving post-VaticanII god in school, when those same children quote the old testament god that gave plagues of locusts and rivers of blood. It sure made sense to me when I heard that kid say it, all those years ago.

Just because someone is raised to be a Catholic does not mean that they believe all of Church dogma.

ShooterSF wrote: »

Lucky you! I believed stuff, horrible stuff about "impure" thoughts and desires and was often miserable and frightened because of it.

Yeah, I was more into the 'repent and all shall be forgiven' carry on. Never heard about impure thoughts or any of that, either in mass or school.

ShooterSF wrote: »

I smile too but our personality is part of our brains and if I had an accident that damaged or affected it I could start believing it again and that really is scary

Ah, when I go senile, I plan on being like one of those old blonde labradors who stiffly wander around, wagging their tails and smiling at nothing.

Obliq

ShooterSF wrote: »

I smile too but our personality is part of our brains and if I had an accident that damaged or affected it I could start believing it again and that really is scary

Y'know, it IS the scariest thing - to think that if there was a horrible accident (or in the event of me having Alzheimer's or something), that I would start believing loved ones were against me, or there was a big scary devil, or that my sons were actually other people....all sorts of imaginings. I'm sure it's a thought that must be scarier for some than others, like when someone has thrown off certain misconceptions/beliefs.

I personally would be terrified to think that one day I might revert to the horribly shy, under-confident person I used to be, with all the hang ups that went with that. I don't know exactly how different the fear of that is, to the fear of reverting to a drummed-in belief like religion. Any different?

ShooterSF

The Mustard wrote: »

I was raised a Catholic, but I was also raised to think for myself. When devout Catholic parents tell their 5 year old that Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden was just a parable, then that five year old is going to wonder what else is parable and to be taken with a pinch of salt. Plus, even schoolchildren raise questions when they are told about a loving post-VaticanII god in school, when those same children quote the old testament god that gave plagues of locusts and rivers of blood. It sure made sense to me when I heard that kid say it, all those years ago.

Just because someone is raised to be a Catholic does not mean that they believe all of Church dogma.


Yeah, I was more into the 'repent and all shall be forgiven' carry on. Never heard about impure thoughts or any of that, either in mass or school.


Ah, when I go senile, I plan on being like one of those old blonde labradors who stiffly wander around, wagging their tails and smiling at nothing.

Oh I was very questioning but also until 15ish someone who had the utmost trust in authority figures; And my school, I wasn't made go to mass and later found out my parents don't really believe in what I was being taught, was very vocal about the whole catholic views on sex, masturbation etc.

I agree that some people that describe themselves as catholic don't actually believe in most of it but it's their fault if they continue to misuse the term "catholic" imo. Theist or even christian might be a truer label.

Obliq wrote: »

Y'know, it IS the scariest thing - to think that if there was a horrible accident (or in the event of me having Alzheimer's or something), that I would start believing loved ones were against me, or there was a big scary devil, or that my sons were actually other people....all sorts of imaginings. I'm sure it's a thought that must be scarier for some than others, like when someone has thrown off certain misconceptions/beliefs.

I personally would be terrified to think that one day I might revert to the horribly shy, under-confident person I used to be, with all the hang ups that went with that. I don't know exactly how different the fear of that is, to the fear of reverting to a drummed-in belief like religion. Any different?

No different. I'm scarily aware that losing a physical attribute is not the only danger that can hit at any time and tbh I think I'd fear the idea of losing part of my personality more so than a limb. Though I admit I get to weigh up that decision from a rather lofty position of possibly never being at risk of either.

Obliq

ShooterSF wrote: »

Though I admit I get to weigh up that decision from a rather lofty position of possibly never being at risk of either.

What's the secret then?!

Zombrex

The Mustard wrote: »

I was raised a Catholic, but I was also raised to think for myself.

Then you weren't raised a Catholic. :P

The issue here seems to be more that you have a rather rose tinted view of religion. Its easy to say what's the big deal when all your experiences of religion are the odd trip to mass where you don't listen to what the priest says and then down to the pub.

The reality though is that this comfortable religion free life was won for you by secularists who have fought long and hard to push back the encroachment of religion on society.

Asking what is the big deal with atheism or secularism is like asking what's the big deal with freedom of speech or right to a fair trial. All these things we take for granted don't necessarily seem all that important as principles, particularly when we find distasteful aspects of it (ie when we want to shut up someone like Fred Phelps or we want to rail road someone like Fred West).

A good example is atheists protesting religious symbols being displayed on government property in the US. People, mostly Christians, think it is about ruining their good time. In reality it isn't about the actual acts at all, few atheists care all that much if a cross is hanging from a court house. They care about the principle, and what the gradual erosion of the principle means in terms of precedence.

You have the luxury of living in a society where secularists have already won you the right to not care about religion. But it would be foolish to think that we can never go back to the old ways. These rights are not won and then forgotten about, it is a process of maintaining such rights.

Pat Mustard

Good post. I'm going to question you on it, but rest assured, I was not offended, nor am I upset in any way. I don't mean to offend either.

Zombrex wrote: »

Then you weren't raised a Catholic. :P

I'm not sure whether you are taking the mick here or not. However, I think I had the same Catholic upbringing as my friends, most of whom are now atheists. However, I think that this has more to do with type of mindset that comes with working in certain occupations.

Zombrex wrote: »

The issue here seems to be more that you have a rather rose tinted view of religion. Its easy to say what's the big deal when all your experiences of religion are the odd trip to mass where you don't listen to what the priest says and then down to the pub.

Maybe I had an a-la-carte Catholic-lite upbringing then, with Buddy Jesus, I don't know . I grew up in the 1980s. Although I'm well aware of Catholic Church ultra-conservatism and abuse, and even Magdelene laundries, I wonder if the view of the Catholic Church as a viable threat harks back to the power that they held in the 1960s rather than the present day situation.

Zombrex wrote: »

The reality though is that this comfortable religion free life was won for you by secularists who have fought long and hard to push back the encroachment of religion on society.

I don't know enough to argue with you on that one.

Zombrex wrote: »

Asking what is the big deal with atheism or secularism is like asking what's the big deal with freedom of speech or right to a fair trial. All these things we take for granted don't necessarily seem all that important as principles, particularly when we find distasteful aspects of it (ie when we want to shut up someone like Fred Phelps or we want to rail road someone like Fred West).

Basically, I can see your point. I've always taken these freedoms for granted. I've grown up with them. But I've grown up with freedom from the British too, and I don't hold a major grudge against them. I'm looking at things the way that they are today. I don't see the struggle that others are talking about in this day and age. Perhaps I'm insulated from it to a greater or lesser extent.

I don't understand why you have referred to Fred West.

Zombrex wrote: »

A good example is atheists protesting religious symbols being displayed on government property in the US. People, mostly Christians, think it is about ruining their good time. In reality it isn't about the actual acts at all, few atheists care all that much if a cross is hanging from a court house. They care about the principle, and what the gradual erosion of the principle means in terms of precedence.

I see the principle, but it's not something with which I agree. I think it goes too far.

Zombrex wrote: »

You have the luxury of living in a society where secularists have already won you the right to not care about religion. But it would be foolish to think that we can never go back to the old ways. These rights are not won and then forgotten about, it is a process of maintaining such rights.

I was about to disagree and say that it could never happen, when I remembered that several countries succumbed to fascism during the 1930s. I'll just say that I don't see it happening any time soon.

Readyhed

What's all this about "Impure Thoughts" ?

Yez mean **** don't yez?

It's alright - athiests are allowed to ****.