Society Religious Discussion and Q&A Thread

[M3J]

I'm sure majority of people are Christians due to brainwashing/having been brought up as Christian before they could critically think.

 

[Raven]

Imagine how better the world could have been without the Abrahamic religions

--- Double Post Merged, May 20, 2021, Original Post Date: May 20, 2021 ---

I'm sure majority of people are Christians due to brainwashing/having been brought up as Christian before they could critically think.

The same apply on any religion, Muslims, Jews, Christianity, Hindu, etc

 

[M3J]

Imagine how better the world could have been without the Abrahamic religions

--- Double Post Merged, May 20, 2021, Original Post Date: May 20, 2021 ---

The same apply on any religion, Muslims, Jews, Christianity, Hindu, etc

I agree with you, I just pointed out Christianity in response to Sanity's post.

 

[Sanity Check]

Established in 1953, the Humanist of the Year Award is conferred annually by the American Humanist Association (AHA), recognizing the awardee as an exemplar of humanist values. Communication of scientific concepts to the public is an important aspect of advancing the cause of humanism. Richard Dawkins was honored in 1996 by the AHA as Humanist of the Year for his significant contributions in this area.

Regrettably, Richard Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values. His latest statement implies that the identities of transgender individuals are fraudulent, while also simultaneously attacking Black identity as one that can be assumed when convenient. His subsequent attempts at clarification are inadequate and convey neither sensitivity nor sincerity.

Consequently, the AHA Board has concluded that Richard Dawkins is no longer deserving of being honored by the AHA, and has voted to withdraw, effective immediately, the 1996 Humanist of the Year award.

American Humanist Association Board Statement Withdrawing Honor from Richard Dawkins - American Humanist Association

The AHA Board votes to withdraw Dawkins' Humanist of the Year award.

americanhumanist.org

What to think of this?

I remember when Richard Dawkins and the AmazingAtheist had large followings.

Now it seems they have none.

 

[ninjabot]

Christians don't have a monopoly on abhorrent social stances. And Atheists don't require thought leaders (why would I need someone to tell me what I do and don't believe? What am I, a Republican?). Hence, the reason the AHA were willing to cut ties with Dawkins for saying such abhorrent things.

Also, the Amazing Atheist still has a pretty hefty following. AA has become more progressive in his beliefs too, becoming less of a "anti SJW" type.

 

[Sanity Check]

My biggest question regarding atheists is... would there be so many of them, if atheism wasn't mandated and endorsed by public schools and universities.

It could be fair to say there are politics and agendas being pushed in schools. A double standard whereby its unacceptable for christians to pray in school. But "ok" for atheist ideology to be endorsed by the state.

 

[xi0]

My biggest question regarding atheists is... would there be so many of them, if atheism wasn't mandated and endorsed by public schools and universities.

It could be fair to say there are politics and agendas being pushed in schools. A double standard whereby its unacceptable for christians to pray in school. But "ok" for atheist ideology to be endorsed by the state.

Everyone is atheist regarding every religion that's ever existed, except the one they believe in.

It's not unacceptable to pray in school, it's protected by the first amendment.

There is no atheist ideology... at least none beyond it being the absence of one based on religion. There's no adoption of atheism by public schools and universities for the sake of endorsing atheism. These institutions are taking a secular stance because the state is secular and it's unconstitutional to promote religion in school.

 

[Raven]

It would be better to adopt a new teaching/faith/doctrine/ way of thinking that you can find relief in, than just inheriting a religion and following it blindly.

 

[M3J]

My biggest question regarding atheists is... would there be so many of them, if atheism wasn't mandated and endorsed by public schools and universities.

It could be fair to say there are politics and agendas being pushed in schools. A double standard whereby its unacceptable for christians to pray in school. But "ok" for atheist ideology to be endorsed by the state.

Atheism is not endorsed by schools and universities. There are more atheists now than compared to the past though because more people are starting to actually critically think and/or think for themselves instead of staying brainwashed or letting society think for them.

There's no double standard other than your imagination. Are you okay with Muslims praying in public school? Buddhists? Hindus? Or do you think only Christians should pray? That would be double standard if you think the latter. In any case, it was a great decision to stop forcing students to pray, it's a waste of time, even more so for students who aren't Christians or whatever the dominant religion of the school is.

And no, it is not fair to say that. The only agenda people are trying to push is republicans trying to push a false narrative of USA being good when in reality, it's been evil and bigoted for decades.

 

[ninjabot]

My biggest question regarding atheists is... would there be so many of them, if atheism wasn't mandated and endorsed by public schools and universities.

It could be fair to say there are politics and agendas being pushed in schools. A double standard whereby its unacceptable for christians to pray in school. But "ok" for atheist ideology to be endorsed by the state.

Atheism isn't mandated. You won't find any workplace or place of education anywhere that says you HAVE to be an atheist. On the contrary, in the united states you'll find places that force you to have the words "In God We Trust", somewhere visible on the premises. THIS is an example of a mandate.

Likewise, atheism isn't endorsed in public schools and universities. Skepticism is. It's just that skepticism often leads to secular modes of thought because religion, regardless of which doctrine, is a huge proponent of faith, and faith isn't a valid path to the truth.


An oldie but a goodie.

 

[Sanity Check]

Everyone is atheist regarding every religion that's ever existed, except the one they believe in.

The correct term there is agnostic.

It's not unacceptable to pray in school, it's protected by the first amendment.

High School Bans Students From Holding Prayer Group in Free Time - The Daily Signal

A Colorado high school banned a group of students from praying, singing Christian songs, and discussing religious topics in their free time.

www.dailysignal.com

Many cases of it being banned.

Many cases of students being punished for being pro Trump, pro 2A.

There is no atheist ideology... at least none beyond it being the absence of one based on religion. There's no adoption of atheism by public schools and universities for the sake of endorsing atheism. These institutions are taking a secular stance because the state is secular and it's unconstitutional to promote religion in school.

Flying spaghetti monster is one example of atheist ideology.

The idea that one must accept all religions, if one accepts a single religion is atheist ideology.

The idea that believing in God is the same as believing in invisible imaginary unicorns is atheist ideology.

Atheists have many ideas and concepts which constitute their stance on the topic of religion.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 18, 2021, Original Post Date: Jun 18, 2021 ---

It would be better to adopt a new teaching/faith/doctrine/ way of thinking that you can find relief in, than just inheriting a religion and following it blindly.

What is old has withstood the test of time. The natural product of many years of evolution.

While the new, is often trendy and harmful in ways people have not identified yet.

 

[kkck]

High School Bans Students From Holding Prayer Group in Free Time - The Daily Signal

A Colorado high school banned a group of students from praying, singing Christian songs, and discussing religious topics in their free time.

www.dailysignal.com

Many cases of it being banned.

Many cases of students being punished for being pro Trump, pro 2A.

did you even read that article? The article makes the case that prayer is protected speech even at schools and the problem there was teachers being morons.

 

[Sanity Check]

Atheism is not endorsed by schools and universities. There's no double standard other than your imagination.

If schools were objective and unbiased. They would educate students on both sides of the debate. Two sides of the story would be presented.

Instead, schools do what the media does to push narratives and agendas. They pretend there is only 1 logical and rational side to every story and debate.

Then schools teach its "impossible" for people to know objective truth under moral relativism.

How can there be only 1 logical and rational side to religion and atheism, if its impossible for people to discern objective truth. Doesn't it seem like a contradiction.

 

[kkck]

If schools were objective and unbiased. They would educate students on both sides of the debate. Two sides of the story would be presented.

Instead, schools do what the media does to push narratives and agendas. They pretend there is only 1 logical and rational side to every story and debate.

Then schools teach its "impossible" for people to know objective truth under moral relativism.

How can there be only 1 logical and rational side to religion and atheism, if its impossible for people to discern objective truth. Doesn't it seem like a contradiction.

And... which specific things do you believe are not getting fair representation in school? What subjects do you want those taught in?

 

[Sanity Check]

Atheism isn't mandated. You won't find any workplace or place of education anywhere that says you HAVE to be an atheist. On the contrary, in the united states you'll find places that force you to have the words "In God We Trust", somewhere visible on the premises. THIS is an example of a mandate.

If you look at the dollar bill...

Look to the left of "In God We Trust". Notice the pyramid with the all seeing eye. That's not an endorsement of the all seeing eye. Its history.

It has a historic and symbolic meaning.

The word "God" appears in the NERV insignia from the anime Neon Genesis Evangelion.

Its not an endorsement of God there, either.

Likewise, atheism isn't endorsed in public schools and universities. Skepticism is. It's just that skepticism often leads to secular modes of thought because religion, regardless of which doctrine, is a huge proponent of faith, and faith isn't a valid path to the truth.


An oldie but a goodie.

Atheism is presented in schools and universities as the only logical and rational stance.

That's like saying there is only one logical and rational stance as far as abortion or other controversial topics go.

It might be fair to say, that's more a form of indoctrination, than it is education.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 18, 2021, Original Post Date: Jun 18, 2021 ---

And... which specific things do you believe are not getting fair representation in school? What subjects do you want those taught in?

Learning history in school is tedious, painful and boring.

Learning history by watching the history channel can be fun.

The same can be said with science, math and every topic covered by schools. They overwhelmingly take subjects that can be fun and entertaining. And somehow manage to make them boring and painful to learn.

The way schools are structured. It seems like the goal is to make people hate learning and have bad life experiences with it. Rather than encouraging students to learn. Or to be empowered through learning.

 

[M3J]

High School Bans Students From Holding Prayer Group in Free Time - The Daily Signal

A Colorado high school banned a group of students from praying, singing Christian songs, and discussing religious topics in their free time.

www.dailysignal.com

Many cases of it being banned.

Many cases of students being punished for being pro Trump, pro 2A.

Daily Signal seems to be incredibly biased and ignorant.

If schools were objective and unbiased. They would educate students on both sides of the debate. Two sides of the story would be presented.

Instead, schools do what the media does to push narratives and agendas. They pretend there is only 1 logical and rational side to every story and debate.

Then schools teach its "impossible" for people to know objective truth under moral relativism.

How can there be only 1 logical and rational side to religion and atheism, if its impossible for people to discern objective truth. Doesn't it seem like a contradiction.

You should be happy schools aren't objective and unbiased, as they teach false history to make USA and white people look good/better than they actually are.

Schools never covered Tulsa, OK massacre or really talked about what happened to Native Americans or Black people throughout the country's history. And if you actually care about objectiveness and unbiased teaching, then you should support Critical Race Theory being taught.

 

[ninjabot]

High School Bans Students From Holding Prayer Group in Free Time - The Daily Signal

A Colorado high school banned a group of students from praying, singing Christian songs, and discussing religious topics in their free time.

www.dailysignal.com

Many cases of it being banned.

Many cases of students being punished for being pro Trump, pro 2A.

This isn't banning prayer. It's banning a prayer group held on campus. Did you even read your own link?

Flying spaghetti monster is one example of atheist ideology.

FSM isn't an ideology it's a fucking meme. To make fun of religion. No one takes it seriously.

The idea that one must accept all religions, if one accepts a single religion is atheist ideology.

That's a strawman. The claim isn't that you have to accept all religions if you accept one. The claim is that you can't disregard any religion based on faith if your own religion is based on faith, because anyone can believe anything based on faith. Again: Faith is not an accurate path to the truth. And there are atheists that follow religions out there (atheistic buddhists for example). If it were an ideology, atheists would frown upon such a thing.

Remember, Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god or gods. There are plenty of non-theistic religions out there.

The idea that believing in God is the same as believing in invisible imaginary unicorns is atheist ideology.

This isn't an ideology either, but I totally agree with it. What's the difference between your god and a unicorn?

Atheists have many ideas and concepts which constitute their stance on the topic of religion.

The only stance atheists share when it comes to religion is "we aren't convinced that your religion is true." That's literally it. We are not a monolith any more than Christians, Jews, or Muslims are.

What is old has withstood the test of time. The natural product of many years of evolution.

How can you tell whether something withstood the test of time thanks to it being a positive aspect of society, versus it being imposed into society through genocide and authoritarianism?

Is homophobia a positive aspect of humanity's growth? Sexism? Slavery? All components of the Abrahamic religions mind you.

While the new, is often trendy and harmful in ways people have not identified yet.

Change is scary. I get it. But evolution IS change. And protecting yourself from new ideas simply prevents you from finding out whether life can be better lived a different way.

[/quote]

Atheism is presented in schools and universities as the only logical and rational stance.

No, it isn't. No one presents atheism as "the rational stance". Naturalism and imperialism both follow skepticism and rely on what's demonstrable in a naturalistic world to determine truths about said naturalistic world. That leaves no room for things claimed about theism, because it requires belief in supernatural things: things we can't demonstrate as true.

That's like saying there is only one logical and rational stance as far as abortion or other controversial topics go.

I mean there is one rational stance as far as abortion goes. The one that doesn't require we believe in supernatural concepts that can't be proven, like a soul.

 

[kkck]

Learning history in school is tedious, painful and boring.

Learning history by watching the history channel can be fun.

The same can be said with science, math and every topic covered by schools. They overwhelmingly take subjects that can be fun and entertaining. And somehow manage to make them boring and painful to learn.

The way schools are structured. It seems like the goal is to make people hate learning and have bad life experiences with it. Rather than encouraging students to learn. Or to be empowered through learning.

That's in no way way, shape, form or context a response to what I asked. I suppose you read as much of my post as you did of that article...

 

[xi0]

The correct term there is agnostic.

No, that's quite the opposite of correct. If you are agnostic, the existence of a deity is unknowable, and that line of thinking applies to all schools of faith. If you are an atheist, you reject the notion that any deity exists, and that line of thinking applies to all schools of faith. If you are religious (or a theist), you choose one to believe and reject all others.

 

[ninjabot]

No, that's quite the opposite of correct. If you are agnostic, the existence of a deity is unknowable, and that line of thinking applies to all schools of faith. If you are an atheist, you reject the notion that any deity exists, and that line of thinking applies to all schools of faith. If you are religious (or a theist), you choose one to believe and reject all others.

You're right, but nowadays, modern atheists (like myself) tend to identify as Agnostic Atheists (thanks to Matt Dillahunty and the rest of the ACA shows affiliated with him), the reason being because while we reject the idea of a god or gods existing, we don't assert as a positive claim that there are none. We're open to the idea of it, we just don't know. We're agnostic to the idea of a god existing, and that agnostic nature means in the interest of honesty we can't be theists because we don't have enough info to be anything other than non-theists.

When friends ask me why I'm an atheist, I narrow it down to 3 reasons:

1: I don't have sufficient enough evidence to convince me that a god or gods exist.
2: The people that assert that a god or gods exist either fail to provide, or choose not to provide, their burden of proof
3: The law of non contradiction.

I guess 1 and 2 coincide, as if a Christian could provide me sufficient evidence to believe that a god exists, then I'd have the evidence I need make the decision for myself.