Is Neo-Atheism The Way to Go? [Poll]

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To ridicule the extremists while tolerating and giving a free pass to the moderates is inconsistent. They are the same illogical paths. One group just happens to be further down it than the other. That's all.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


the more ridiculous the beliefs the more ridicule they deserve.

Its not generally individuals who are being mocked but the belief systems and religous authorities. We don't follow someone around pouring scorn on them for being christian but taking the piss out of ideas like virgin births, popes, dinasours on the ark etc etc is all good stuff.

The only time we need to pick on individuals who aren't professionals (popes, priests, vicars etc) is when they are dishonest (e.g IDers) or odious (persecute others)

chez


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



But this is exactly what I mean by being inconsistent. Some 50% of Americans DO believe in virgin births, popes, and dinosaurs on the Ark! I'm not suggesting we follow these people around and mock them at every turn, but what about strongly mocking these beliefs? Do you think we do that? Not at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
Speak for yourself. Here in the free world we mock that guff all the time [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
In all likelihood our president holds these beliefs. Has he been mocked for them? Not at all!

[/ QUOTE ]
We mock him here. Blair has just revealed he kept quiet about his religous beliefs for fear of being branded a loony.

chez

[madnak]

Oh yeah...

[ QUOTE ]
Somehow, I guess, they think of you as two people - the atheist who shouldn't even be a citizen and the atheist who is a great neighbor and businessman to deal with. I don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "neighbor" thing I've never seen. You're in the US and people think atheists are good neighbors? Can you back that up?

The business thing... Well, atheists are "good at business" the way Jews are "good at business." If you catch my drift.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this thread is confusing religious belief with religious people. Those arguing for mockery are focussing on the silly beliefs, those arguing for civility are focussing on the people holding them.

I think you should respect me and mock my silly beliefs. (As an aside, I reject the claim that religious belief entails certainty, but concede that most believers say it does. In my opinion, the real problem stems from being sure your mystical beliefs are correct, not from the fact that you have them).

[/ QUOTE ]

There's also the hidden issue we've avoided so far. But it has to come up. That's the issue of proselytism.

Are we justified in doing whatever it takes to spread atheism? If so, then aren't the theists equally justified in doing whatever it takes to spread their beliefs? It's not just the specific tactics that matter, but the general approach. Attacking the logic of theistic beliefs is one thing, but getting into more general mockery treads awfully close to hypocrisy.

Most of all, I don't think our hatred of or disdain for religion should override the principle of "live and let live." I think this is really where some atheists go off track.

[Lestat]

Perhaps you're unintentionally making a case for the good mocking does. It seems to have worked over there. You guys are more secular than we are here in the states. (although don't you have an increasingly huge Muslim population?).

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you're unintentionally making a case for the good mocking does. It seems to have worked over there. You guys are more secular than we are here in the states. (although don't you have an increasingly huge Muslim population?).

[/ QUOTE ]
The best anti-extreme-islam humour comes from the muslim community.

Mocking works. Let us not forget how Monty Python died for us, frequently.

chez

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah...

[ QUOTE ]
Somehow, I guess, they think of you as two people - the atheist who shouldn't even be a citizen and the atheist who is a great neighbor and businessman to deal with. I don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "neighbor" thing I've never seen. You're in the US and people think atheists are good neighbors? Can you back that up?

The business thing... Well, atheists are "good at business" the way Jews are "good at business." If you catch my drift.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was approaching it as a martian. Finding out that atheists are deemed unfit for citizenship by a president and unfit for office by a large majority of the population would have me predict that they are not held in high regard and are repressed in other social instances ... without even hearing about them. As a rational martian I couldn't conceive of atheists being considered 'equal' and not discriminated against in business or the general mix on the political data I had.

I know they are, with some pockets of exception, I was challenging the concept that reality could be "well, heck, so you can't just run for federal office, big deal".

luckyme

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
If so, then aren't the theists equally justified in doing whatever it takes to spread their beliefs?

[/ QUOTE ]

My neighbor is an atheist.
Please list his beliefs.

luckyme

[madnak]

It's a valid distinction in terms of philosophy, but I'm not buying it in terms of practice.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
There are very important issues at stake (stem-cell research comes to mind, as does abortion and birth control), where our leaders cannot admit to being guided by rational reasoning. A politician cannot say for example, "It is ridiculous to think that a blastocyst has a soul, because for one thing, there are no such things as souls!".

[/ QUOTE ]

And yet plenty of politicians who are ostensibly religious are in favor of legal access to abortion, over-the-counter emergency contraception, and embryonic stem cell research. I'd imagine you could find a decent number of atheists who are against abortion and embryonic stem cell research, too, as the soul is obviously a red herring for that discussion. (EDIT: That is, I'm pretty sure you could find non-theists who still think it is murder to kill an embryo because it is in some sense a living human, soul or no.)

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are very important issues at stake (stem-cell research comes to mind, as does abortion and birth control), where our leaders cannot admit to being guided by rational reasoning. A politician cannot say for example, "It is ridiculous to think that a blastocyst has a soul, because for one thing, there are no such things as souls!".

[/ QUOTE ]

And yet plenty of politicians who are ostensibly religious are in favor of legal access to abortion, over-the-counter emergency contraception, and embryonic stem cell research. I'd imagine you could find a decent number of atheists who are against abortion and embryonic stem cell research, too, as the soul is obviously a red herring for that discussion. (EDIT: That is, I'm pretty sure you could find non-theists who still think it is murder to kill an embryo because it is in some sense a living human, soul or no.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll concede you have a point about there being reasons other than religious ones to be against things like stem-cell research and contraception. But there's no denying that religious tenets make up the bulk of the opposition. So it is anything but a red herring.