Outlawing atheism

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Black Irish, Aug 9, 2021.

  1. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I only had the to read the very first line of your post
    to see that you are continuing to adjust...
    Look at your post above..."your diagnosis of religion as being a problem for humans, so prescribing its elimination".
    I did not say that "religion" is a problem.
    I'm saying that "religion" is not an answer to the dilemmas we face in the present.

    Nor have I ever said anything about...."prescribing its elimination".
    The fact is, I've stated the exact opposite several times now....

    Now please pay attention to the word "That" underlined above.
    That word is not a reference to "religion" itself....
    it is a reference to the observations that....
    "religion" has missed the whole point completely.
    It is worthless.
    That IMO is the reason society continues to deteriorate....and the environment along with it....

    "Religion" has simply "missed the mark" so to speak....
    and that is precisely what the word "sin" in the Bible is used for.
    It's an archery term that means "missing the mark".

     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
    FreshAir likes this.
  2. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If self reflective accountability (religion) is not the solution, what works better? The state? Your inference implies there is a solution out there, and its not religion, so what is it if not religion?
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  3. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thank you for reply.
    IMO...the statement above which includes...."If self reflective accountability (religion)"
    can be confusing in the sense that "reflective accountability" and "religion"
    are very seldom, if at all, directly proportional.


    And I also agree with you in regard to "The state".
    IMO..."The state" is nothing more than a placebo.
    It's effective only as long as you believe it to be helpful.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  4. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    so then you condemn religion as ineffective but have no alternative suggestion much less solution.
    Thats not possible, everyone has religion that is not in a coma or dead.
    Thats equivalent to claiming you cant have a thought, you cant have a moral, you cant have beliefs, you cant have the quality of generous, or mean, or nice whatever.
    Having strongly held beliefs IS your creed, and exercising those beliefs in practice IS your religion.
    Cant wait to hear this one, explain please.
    So you have nothing that you believe, no morals, nothing you govern your life by outside state regs?
    huh??
    whats that supposed to mean? State approval?
    Worship can be included but is not required for soemthing to be understood and fully qualify as religion.
    What is strongly held beliefs for 100!
    So atheists have no morals, no beliefs regarding G/gods, no world views, zippo, an empty can is that it?
    Yeh if you ran out of rebuttals and wish to concede by dropping out, whatever...
    Natural versus supernatural, atheism is grounded in the natural, ie if you cant hit it with a hammer it does not exist, theism on the other hand is grounded in the supernatural, that which cannot be hit with a hammer.

    That was a good one, about agnostic, I had to grin when I read that. It makes sense on that level but there is underlying reasoning that overrules it.

    Agnostic like atheism and theism is a decision if nothing else a worldview, it is a conscious evaluation and choice of a specific religious position, that choice is neither atheists nor theists have an acceptable religion, hence agnosticism a 3rd choice of religion is chosen.

    Agnostics have strongly held beliefs that they live by, just like theists and atheists, hence we too have have and fulfill the definition of religion, (secular).
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  5. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'll respond with one of my favorite quotes....
    I don't understand this attraction people have to the word "condemn".
    If I imply "religion" is "ineffective"....that is simply an observation and my opinion.
    I am not "condemning" anyone or anything.
    There is no point in condemning "religion"
    or anything else for that matter.
     
    FreshAir likes this.
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    because that is precisely what you have done.
    You have condemned it as ineffective
    things that are ineffective are useless
    no need to have anything useless in our lives
    yet you dont offer anything to replace it
    so what are you comparing it too

    con·demn
    verb

    1.
    express complete disapproval of, typically in public; censure.

    So whats the alternative? If you are going to condemn one system you should at least have an alternative better one, otherwise your claims are moot, especially since 'religion' is not enforced upon you or anyone, and its what you personally decide is right or wrong.

    Basically you are blaming religion instead of the people who do the dirty deeds.

    Maybe the problem of all the nasty taking place in the world that cant be fixed is really because atheism is on the rise, the 'new' religion, so its not religion, but the old religion being replaced by a new religion.....
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  7. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    6,112
    Likes Received:
    2,610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I see you've been doing a lot of reading-- maybe you did some skimming, but that's not at all what I'd said. You took my quote you of context. I was explaining to Patricio, why the answer he gave to my question, was not a fair one; that is, I sincerely wanted to know his mental rationale for setting agnostics apart from both the religious, & from atheists. I was not, as he'd said (I think with you, in mind), only working some angle to make an argument that one needed to be religious in order to have morals. That is why morals "never entered the question," of his discrimination between atheists & agnostics. You see?
     
  8. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Congratulations for presenting a Logical Fallacy, since no alternative to religion is necessary.

    That is simply not true. You have presented another Logical Fallacy, specifically Persuasive Definition where you have re-defined the historically accept definition of religion in order to avoid getting beat down and losing the argument.

    A creed alone does not equate to a religion.

    If we accept your false definition, then both racism and pedophilia would be religions and protected by the 1st Amendment. Good luck explaining to your 5 year old how your redefining of religion made it perfectly okay for a pedophile to rape him/her.

    I don't need religion or gods to be moral.

    It is an irrefutable fact that I am morally superior to your god-thing, and that your god-thing is morally inferior to me.

    I despise despots, tyrants and dictators. Your god-thing loves them.

    I'm for democratic forms of government. Your god-thing hates democracy.

    I oppose slavery. Your god-thing condones and supports slavery and even provides laws on how to be a good slave-master.

    Your god-thing treats women as 2nd Class Citizens. I don't.

    Your god-thing suffers from acute jealousy. I moved beyond jealousy when I was 8 years old.

    Your god-thing is a murderous thug. I'm not.

    Not only am I morally superior to your god-thing, I'm a better soldier, a better commander, a better leader, a better teacher and a better scientist than your god-thing ever hopes to be.

    In short, your god-thing was the original NAZI.

    The State uses the historical definition of religion in combination with the technical and legal definitions held for the last 7,000 years of written language.

    A creed does not rise to the level of religion. Neither does a belief system and neither does a creed with a belief system.

    A religion has a well-defined organization, structure and hierarchy; a supreme leader; sacred texts; temporal laws separate and apart from secular laws; reward and punishment based on the temporal laws; a creed; and an eschatology, to name but a few things.
     
    gabmux likes this.
  9. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    citation for those requirements please?
    Unless of course those requirements do not exist and are a figment of your imagination
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  10. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now replace the word "condemned" with the word "described" or perhaps "labeled".
    "You have labeled it as ineffective
    things that are ineffective are useless
    no need to have anything useless in our lives
    yet you dont offer anything to replace it
    so what are you comparing it too"

    Bingo!
    If you were diabetic with an attachment to sugar,
    and I said to you that "sugar is not helping your condition...
    you should let go of it (
    the attachment)".
    Am I condemning sugar? Am I condemning you?

    I am not condemning anyone or anything.
    It is pointless to condemn anyone or anything.

    As long as you redefine my posts to your own preference...my "opinions" (not "claims") will always be moot.
    So why waste your effort....or mine.

    Here's an idea...go tell Bob he's "condemning" religion....
    http://politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/religion-is-silly-fairy-tales.590783/
    ...let's see what he says.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
    FreshAir likes this.
  11. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ridiculous
    if you buy a car that is ineffective and fails to perform what its designed to do, ie transport your butt around town, then based on that silly set of euphemisms we are to presume you are pleased and cant wait to buy 5 more 'ineffective cars'.
    puhlease.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  12. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    125,829
    Likes Received:
    48,528
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no, that would violate the constitution, many atheist religions out there, outlawing them would be unconstitutional and against what American stands for

    that would violate both freedom of speech and freedom of religion
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
    gabmux likes this.
  13. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    125,829
    Likes Received:
    48,528
    Trophy Points:
    113
    exactly
     
  14. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That makes zero sense so far....
    are you comparing the "ineffective car" to "religion"??
    If so....why would I wish for even more "ineffective religions"??

    It would even be pointless to "condemn" an "ineffective car"
    you could sell it, fix it up, give it away or junk it.
    What would be the point of condemning it??
    What's the point of condemning anything??
     
    FreshAir likes this.
  15. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yep it clearly illustrates your use of the word ineffective, that it is pointless and meaningless.

    Most sane people throw ineffective products in the scrap heap where they belong, so they can be recycled into something effective.
    so other people do not buy it, or into it which IS your point.

    not so you are free to obey the law, you are not free to disobey the law, freedom is not a biconditional.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  16. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    45,776
    Likes Received:
    12,109
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can't just pick on some attribute of religion. Religion has a number of key attributes - it's a system, it includes worship, it is deeply held, it usually involves a "higher power" of some sort - a god, or crystals, or whatever, etc.

    We call things "religion" in common parlance as an expression - when it is crystal clear that they are NOT religion. Ascribing to the beliefs of the RNC or Socialism is NOT a religion.

    If you really want to claim something IS religion, it becomes necessary to actually defend that desire against what religion actually is.

    So, for example, atheism is NOT a system. It does NOT include worship. It does not involve a higher power.
     
  17. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Citation for those requirements please?
    Unless of course you are making it all up.
    That may be what you want to spin it into, common parlance is not what I am talking about, so that is a pointless comment.
    What is it, actually? Citation?
    I see no citation that a system is a requirement, citation please?
    I see no citation that worship is a requirement to be a religion, citation please?
    I see no citation that a higher power is a requirement to be a religion, citation please?
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  18. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    45,776
    Likes Received:
    12,109
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There isn't a single agreed precise definition of "religion", though there are numerous tries in the dictionaries available on line. And, they each have references to elements I've mentioned.

    That is, the various definitions of religion do share most of their characteristics.

    There is a good discussion in Wiki.

    Your claims tend to ignore the central themes that are included in the numerous but similar definitions of what religion is and what its sources are.
     
  19. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Since when do people take my advice...
    or anybody else's advice for that matter??
    In fact the more you "condemn" something,
    the more likely they are to do it.
    Same goes for "abolishing" anything...
    the more you try to take something away,
    the harder they'll persist in keeping it.

    Neither of those things have anything to do with my posts....
    and yet you keep insisting they are my motives.
    Why?
     
  20. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes that was one of the options I listed below....
    The junk yard will recycle everything they can.
    Are you suggesting recycling religion??
    If so, how would that work?
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  21. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    45,776
    Likes Received:
    12,109
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just to be perhaps overly pendantic...

    I don't know of a city that sifts garbage to find recyclables. If there is such a city, I'd seriously like to know about it.

    So, I'm guessing that by "junk yard" you mean places that have specific acceptance criteria.

    Here in Seattle there are places that will take just about anything with wires - computers, TVs, fans, security crap, modems, whatever.

    They try to find homes for it, and try to recycle the rest.
     
  22. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    6,112
    Likes Received:
    2,610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I will, as it turns out, address your diabetic, false analogy, once more. And thank you for the perfect intro:

    Because it is YOU who has been involved, I recalled, in thread REVISIONISM.
    Here, you try to prove that you were not condemning religion, by suggesting that people "bury," them. That, you now contend, was like the simple, helpful suggestion, to a diabetic, to cut down on the sugar. But that's not the way you depicted it, in your thread:



    So let's plug in your ACTUAL, ORIGINAL concept, used in your thread, of a religious person being like a DRUG ADDICT-- as if using that other "brown sugar (heroin)."

    So if you tell a junkie, to get off the smack, before it kills him, are you condemning the drugs?
    Are you insulting him (if he disagrees that his religion is some illicit, harmful substance)?

    So who is the one, adjusting what they are calling their view?
    But this is nothing new, for you:

    Claim "A":
    Claim "B":

    One more time-- see if you can spot any discrepancies.
    Claim "A":

    Claim "B":

    And now, if things run true to form, you will respond by saying that it is actually ME, who speaks from both sides of his mouth, in disingenuous, self-justification. But YOU will merely allege it-- I could produce many examples of this, as well, if anyone has appetite for more-- without any verifying posts (as with your "adjusting," smear, above). And we will all be left to wonder: which one is telling the truth?
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  23. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    20,798
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    con·demn
    verb
    1.
    express complete disapproval of, typically in public; censure.

    We did this already
     
  24. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not my intention at all. It would be pointless.
    But thanks for quoting these posts again....

     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2021
  25. gabmux

    gabmux Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 17, 2013
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Would my disapproval of something make it any more or less worthless?
    It would pointless for me to condemn anything.
    What exactly is your attraction to the word condemn?
    Why is that so important to you?
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2021

Share This Page