I can appreciate the olive branch a, sapphen, and I'm glad you've gotten something out of your experience here - even if that's only a better understanding of what seperates us and more importantly what we have in common.

Still, there are things you talk about that I cannot in good conscious support right now. They don't stem from your Christian POV on what we should do and why. Rather, I have a promlem with the live and let live approach you advocate generally speaking.

Let me preface this by saying that the majority of my family and I'd say about half of my close friends do believe in some sort of diety or another. I would never infringe upon their right to hold whatever beliefs they may have - though I will on occasion challenge such things. Individual beliefs don't bother me, what is done in the the name of such does.

For the last few decades, most atheists, some notable exceptions aside, have been of the "live and let live" philosophy. We formed the RRS, in part, because we saw such a stance was getting us nowhere, and that there were reall consequences to being so passive.

When politicians and preachers hold the reigns of our society and make policy for ALL of us based on what we see as irrational beliefs, we aren't doing ourselves any favors by being silent.

When issues like reproductive rights, mideast policy, scientific research and basic education are influenced to the degree that they are in our culture by such people and beliefs, it would be utter maddness to not step up and cry foul and challenge such things on a very basic and fundamental level.

I think you DO see that our enemies, and yours to a very real degree, are dogma, arrogance, ignorance, the blurring of the lines between church and state and blind faith and devotion. While I DO see your beliefs as irrational, I don't see you as part of this problem - rather as part of a potential solution.

You seem to see our common interests and our common problems. You also seem to understand that we have a lot in common when push comes to shove and that we're not your personal enemy or bad people - we're simply an all to often marginalized minority fighting for a bit of fair play and recognition; we'll that and we do want to fundamentally change the world we live in.

Still, like I said, I see you as part of the solution, and here is why. You understand these things and you probably have a better shot of making others who believe similarly to you understand than we do - simply because that sort of education would be coming from a source percieved as less hostile.

What I would propose is that if you really DO want a live and let live world where we simply debate things like religion for purely intellectual and spiritual purposes, that you speak up as well. When a politician makes policy based on religious beliefs or says something utterly asinine about science or atheists - you should be screaming just as loudly as we are.

When a politician or preacher claims a blastocyst has a soul, speak up. When the local school board wants ID taught, speak up. When homosexuals are denied rights based upon a religious notion of what marriage is, speak up.

Fundamentalists are your problem as much as they are mine, and it's time for believers to take up the fight and responsibility of fighting them as we've done.

When the dust settles, we can have a nice, civil conversation about beliefs, secure in the knowledge that at the end of the day neither of us our going to have our rights trampled or be railroaded into Orwellian nightmares by people much more ignorant and closed-minded and far less enlightened than ourselves.

As stated above, fundamentalists are the problem. As most Atheists will agree, I have absolutely no problem with theists, just their religion. Since we can't walk up and say "Hey, religion, whats up with XXX" we have to ask the theist which makes it come off as rude, mean, or whatever else you can associate with it. 

About the teachings of Jesus. Many Atheists believe that his basic teachings is fundamental human morality. I know I don't need a religion to tell me that I shouldn't rob a bank. All you have to ask yourself is this, if you aren't sure immediately.

"Will I feel bad after doing this?"

If the answer is "Yes, I will" then it's probably bad. Probably. 

I think that is the most important purpose that RRS serves.



I readily admit that I don't know if a god exists. Are you an agnostic theist? If not then you are admitting that you have an answer when you don't.



Whoa.. Is there anyone posting here who wants to end people's right to believe whatever they want? As far as uniting under a common goal; I appreciate any efforts you make to end religion, but religion isn't at the core of irrational beliefs - It's a product of irrational beliefs.



I attack the concept of god because it's not based on evidence. It's accepting claims as true on insufficient evidence that is at the core of irrational beliefs and it's all irrational beliefs that the world would be better off without.



I personally don't know any atheist who wants to forcibly eradicate any one's beliefs. We aren't out there yanking bibles out of peoples hands. We are trying to stimulate debate and throw our ideas on the pile. It is a war a war of ideas, not of force.

Beliefs do lead to discovery, but they have to travel through knowledge to get there. The god concept never gets past the belief part.

As for the ongoing debate (Which hasn't actually being going on that long in the scope of human history, we aren't that far removed from the days when freethinkers were burnt at the stake or otherwise felt they absolutely had to closet their beliefs.) the ride should take us to a more progressive society. At least a society that understands that atheists aren't corrupt fools who can do no good (Psalms 14:1), and that we have philosophical reasons for not believing rather than the lies that pastors and holy books have used to shape the public's opinion about why we disbelieve and has led us to be the most distrusted minority in America.



I'm sure you've been around the forum here long enough to know that the burden of proof is on the person making a claim that something exists.



I won't mull over the same issues with the same person once I know they understand my position. The same issues get mulled over and over here because there is a constant flow of people both reading and posting.



I do get along with people who hold different opinions than me.



I don't feel that a theist who is trying to convince me that their views are right is treating me with animosity. It's when they attack my character rather than my ideas that I feel that they are treating me with animosity.



Do you feel that we are robbing people of their beliefs? If so, how so?



If religion was just throwing around grains of salt then I would approach it with a light heart.



If I saw that religion didn't cause a negative impact on society then we might talk about agreeing to disagree, but until then I feel it's a moral duty to speak out against it. 

A lot of theists will never be able to agree to disagree because they are called upon to try to win converts and they think that the actions and beliefs of others will cause their god's wrath to come down on all of society.

Was there a time when atheists weren't misjudged?



I challenge you to re-read the bible, but this time to do it with the idea that it could possibly be wrong and when you come across the filth, absurdities, injustice and immorality within it, don't whitewash it or do crazy mental gymnastics to try to reconcile it with what you know is right.



There are no good sides to theism that can't be achieved without it. On the other hand there are many bad things about theism that can't be achieved without it.



Religion makes people not want to question because it says it provides all the answers. Religion makes people scared to question because of scare tactics..whether it be hell, fear of social osterization or fear of displeasing god etc..



God created man? You have evidence? If not why do you expect us to believe you and allow for you to build anything else upon that premise?

It's like if I said to you that I am typing this from the inside of a live whale at the bottom of the ocean and there are smurfs down here, we have a billion dollars and we just need you to come and get us. At what point do you stop to question what I am saying and write the rest off as non-sense? I stop right at the being inside of a live whale.  



This is the non-sense I was talking about. ^^^



Who is forcing non-god on you? We are simply throwing our ideas on the pile. I don't know of any atheist who would take away your right to believe whatever you want. Perhaps you are feeling like we are forcing non-god on you because you can't refute our arguments.



It's because nearly all of us are very familiar with Christianity. We know how Jesus reached people in the story, we just don't believe the story is true. Back to the inside of a whale analogy.



I have nothing against people for standing up for what they believe in. I just believe they should be prepared to defend what they believe in and not think their belief is above honest scrutiny.  



I would say none. I don't think there has been anything close to a True Christian ever since the Dark Ages . Again I challenge you to re-read the bible without Jesus goggles on.



Do you respect the opinions of bin Laden, racists etc..? I wish for you to respect my right to hold my opinions, not my opinions that you disagree with.



I am proud to boast that I had nothing to do with the formation of any religions or holy texts.



It's not my goal to disprove god. It's my goal to show people that there is no reason to believe there is one.



A movement is taking place right now.

I have noticed that theists are less for actual freedom of religion then every atheist i have ever met. No atheist i know wants to take away the right to believe what ever you want. Some ,me included, just think that if you want to speak it as truth and make policy on those beliefs I will critsize it. I will demand evidence for these beliefs if it effects me in anyway, and telling me that it is the truth is effecting me. RElgious beliefs should be as much open to debate as politcal beliefs. They should not get a free pass,period.

Good luck finding one. The Jeffersonian deists are few and far between.

Jefferson could not get ellected president today if he ran. He denied what he called the "magic" fable class of Jesus as being the same class as Minerva being born out of the brain of Jupiter.

Jefferson would most likely have liked to hang out with us than some fundy Robertson type. He would have been open, even to criticism of his own beliefs and wouldnt raise an eybrow to even blaspheming them.

Me, "Thomas, your "God of nature" is to me in the same ambigious class as any set religious label and I think you are just as full of it as they are"

Him, "Really really Brian? Why do you say that?"

NOT

Me, "Thomas, you are full of crap."

Him, "YOU HATE ME, DONT HURT MY FEELINGS|"

He wouldnt have been offended in the least to crictisism or even ridiclue. I think he would have simply asked why we say what we say.

I dont think any theist of any label need to worry about any atheist here seeking to use government to squash dissent. We merely want people to look hard at their own claims without fear. We also dont want any religion propped up by goverment, not just Christianity. It is that simple.

As shocking as it may sound to theist visitors we dont barbaque kittens or drink goats blood and we dont worship Hitler. We want the same things in life. A family that loves us, food on the table, roof over our heads and a safe place to live. 

The roadblock is not caused by atheists. We are not doing anything differently than other minority groups have done in the past. It is the fear of the unknown that causes the theist to needlessly fear us. Get over your fear and learn from us. If it doesnt change your mind, we wont force you to change your mind, but it should at least show theists that we are not that different and just as diverse in thinking, outside the issue of god belief.

Suprise, we fart, poop, pay taxes and will become worm food just like everyone else on the planet. 

 

 

Exelent analogy. It's kinda like when your friend walks out of the bathroom with toilet paper hanging out of their pants. The idiot says nothing, the friend points it out.

But in this honest criticism which I agree with we must not forget that we are all subject to human emotion and human flaws regardless of label.

We still have a duty to ourselves as individuals, to understand that if we have empathy and are capable of compassion than those we dissagree with can too.

Dont get me wrong. Anyone who knows me knows I am not afraid to throw a verbal punch. But I am damn sure not going to do what authoritiarian "I am better than you" egotistical rule does be it Hitler like or the Christianity of the dark ages.

I may bitch and complain about what absurdities are out there, but I wont seek to opress dissent because if it were not for my own freedom, I would be squashed myself.

Remember. There are 6 billion people on this planet and trying to force a utopia is absurd. 

I am not suggesting , "Lets agree to dissagree". But at the same time we should all say, "No matter how much we dissagree or even dislike each other, we dont have to kill or opress".

One is an issue of debate. The other is the issue of human rights. I have the right to bitch. I dont have the right to kill simply because someone believes something I think is absurd. Theists believe not believing is in a god is absurd. Should they have the right to opress us?

It is not a matter of right or wrong. We are right. But we cant expect to make progress if we become opressors ourselves like theists have in human history. 

 

    dj, if you are suggesting that people don't have rights to their beliefs, i would suggest that the aggressive and suppressive nature that you hate in religion in only a mirror away. 

i respect you but you are foolish to scarecrow something you clearly did not read nor understand.  i am coming here to earn your respect by rational means.  i have not hit any "brick walls" for i am still growing and learning.  i try hard to understand what you guys are saying and i see a common goal that we can consider and talk about like "rational and reasonable" people.  there is no fault in giving another human being respect, you should try it sometime.

i did not pose an argument but a thought to be a basis of conversation. i was asking for creative input from my personal opinion.  if we are to find peace with different beliefs we both must sacrifice.

on piles thread, what do we scarifice?  i questioned every thought i had since i was 12 years old.  i put on the line my family, my wife's respect of me, my stand as a christian, my God's will, and my personal feelings. all that i ask is a little bit more respect than some retort you thought witty. i was hoping for a way that we can find a mends beyond the bigots of conventional religion.

 to me you are no different than the christians i fight with about love and understanding.  the same christians that come on here and spout ignorance and disgust. forgive my cander but you are out of line. if you are going to comment on something i suggest you pull it from somewhere else than your collective ass.

in order to obtain peace we must first have it in mind and bring our thoughts to it.  are you prepared to love you "partner" if she was to convert to christianity? all i ask is that we consider religion and God separate, if you would like to actually read my reasons then maybe then we can continue this in a less passionate discourse.

brain37, you are a better man than i.  i think you summed up what dj might have been saying.  put in your words, i can completly accept and respect that.

i almost wish i had read your post first, thank you for comment. 

I completely understand Stillmatic. I have a bad habit of that but at least it isn't all caps and in one huge paragraph! lol. I have too certain pet peeves in sentence structure, I just have one less than you do. (Maybe more, just assuming).

I think short summery of what I wanted to say is that no one is ever going to believe the same thing as everyone else. We will always have different views but we should look for peace. That does not mean that we should not talk about our differences but in more civil and rational ways. I also suggest that we have a common problem which is religion.

I do believe that God is separate from religion and that religion has ran it's course. I think we need to unite on the similarities we have and let bygones be bygones. God never asked us to force our beliefs on others but to share and discuss. We both should have equal opportunity in that and it would help if we did it in a light-hearted attitude.

After reading your comments on the subject I believe I am only speaking to half the crowd. I now must journey to my brothers and try to tell them that religion is separate from God, without trying to force my opinion or offend their beliefs. Change does take some time and to borrow a friends idea and quote;

"The time is always right to do what is right." -Martin Luther King Jr.

We are similar in a lot of ways. There must be a way for peace.. maybe not now but we need to work towards it.

 

EDIT IN: rephrased "God made man, man made religion" to "religion is separate from God". 

Thank you for the complement but please understand without prejudice that I DO HAVE FANGES "Not in the litteral sense" but in the "If I think you are full of crap I dont mince words" sense.

So be advised that I may thank you for your complement that does not obligate me to agree with everything you might claim.

Now accept that I am the greatest thing since sliced bread and we will have no futher beefs. That or roll a newspaper up and rapp me over the nose. 

I think I was making the same statement.

Any idiot who thinks it is their right, be they atheist or theist to squash dissent has a severe lack of empathy for human rights.

It is my position that deity belief is absurd. But what kind of human would I be to arrest or kill because they believe something I find to be absurd? Isnt that what theists think about those outside their religion? Isnt that what theists think of atheists? Isnt that the justification Hitler had for the genocide of Jews?

You cant force the the end of absurdities. You cant force people to like you. You can use your own voice. You can bitch, everyone can and is part of normal human behaivor. What is absurd is taking the point of "bitching" to the point of government policy.

I would be just as afraid of an atheist seeking autocratic rule as any atheist should be when a theist seeks rule by one.

Saying that deity belief is absurd doesnt give us license to genocide anymore than we'd want theists gassing us because we dont believe.