Atheist Unicyclists

[JJuggle]

Raphael: Since Saddam's government was not religious....Are you saying that Christian Fundamentalists are responsible for starting the war in IRAQ??!!More like kleptocrats who happen to be Christian Fundamentalists. Either one would be sufficient.

[BillyTheMountain]

Billy, you say that like it's news?!?

I think inside the US, it probably would be news to most, unfortunately.

GILby=GILd. Proof positive, same person, share the same attitudes, both Atheists, both unicycle, now both are conspiracy theorists about the Iraq War.....

Now if I could only figure out who EthylTheTree is. She's really cramping my style with Blake.....

Billy

http://www.demaction.org/dia/organizations/darfur/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=1625

[Seager]

Isn't a Bush a Christian Fundalmentalist? He sure uses God as justification a lot.

You bring up a good point though. Terrorism is fueled by religion (and oppression) so why did we attack a secular state who HAD met with and then REFUSED to help Bin Laden?

[BillyTheMountain]

Isn't a Bush a Christian Fundalmentalist? He sure uses God as justification a lot.

You bring up a good point though. Terrorism is fueled by religion (and oppression) so why did we attack a secular state who HAD met with and then REFUSED to help Bin Laden?

According to the latest story, part of the justification to invade Iraq--the intell that there was a connection between Saddam and Osama-- was based on flawed intell that resulted from torturing a guy in Egypt.

The best case against torture--a torture victim will tell you anything to get the torture to stop. Over the years they have confessed to being witches in Massachusetts, and now this. no suprise. Of course, anyone with any knowledge of world affairs would have known it was not credible. Millions of Americans joined with the rest of the world to prevent this war, seeing clearly all the BS.

[Mikefule]

a torture victim will tell you anything to get the torture to stop. Over the years they have confessed to being witches in Massachusetts.

I think under the most dreadful torture, I still wouldn't say Massachusetts. Maybe Derbyshire, if they beat my soles with flex.

Seager said
<<Isn't a Bush a Christian Fundalmentalist? He sure uses God as justification a lot.>>

Hmmm. How fundamentally Christian is that? I haven't read any version of the Bible for quite a while, but even allowing for biased reporting by his disciples years later, and multiple sequential translations by people with vested interests, I still can't recall a bit that could easily be interpreted as saying that Jesus was a strong advocate of unprovoked warfare. Bush is as Christian as the 9/11 bombers were Muslim, and the IRA were Roman Catholic. i.e. only in his own tiny mind.

[Seager]

Seager said
<<Isn't a Bush a Christian Fundalmentalist? He sure uses God as justification a lot.>>

Hmmm. How fundamentally Christian is that?

I think we're having a cultural definition problem here. The term "Christian Fundamentalist" when used in the states is closer in definition to "christian wacko." Pat Robertson, Falwell, Phelps, etc would all be defined at Christian Fundamentalists. Generally the term is shortened to "fundy" which is fairly derogatory.

Used in a (true) sentence:

Bush is so fundy that he won't fund organizations that promote condoms in Africa to stop AIDS because Jesus told him that "abstinence only" was better.

<<quote: Bush is as Christian as the 9/11 bombers were Muslim, and the IRA were Roman Catholic. i.e. only in his own tiny mind.>>

Most Fundies have the above problem.

[phlegm]

"Fundamentalism" in Christianity & Islam (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reac_ter9.htm)

[mscalisi]

I'm sure we agree with more than that. Actually, I agree with most of your posts.

Hey, something I agree with! Maybe... I'm no vegetarian, but I do have a low meat diet and make an effort to only eat meat that wasn't factory farmed. So, have we talked about vegetarianism yet? How many more 'ism's are left undiscussed in this thread? ;)

[mscalisi]

It will be interesting to see what the future holds. I'm not sure that technology is necessary to live solely off plants...of course I consume lots of tofu and rice/soy milk, and I guess those are fortified....but anyways...

I think we're designed to eat whatever is available....so yes, omnivorous (definitely not carnivorous). I don't feel like a vegetarian/vegan diet is unnatural, after not having meat for over ten years, I can honestly say that I have no desire.

Regarding being "preachy": Learning about what really happens in our food industry can cause one to become very angry, and to feel strongly that if they could show other people what they discovered, they would surely have to agree and change their actions.


...of course this is not reality, but still I can sympathize with people who are "preachy" because I've been in their shoes and felt what they feel.

...anyways, another thread, another day.


No, that wasn't preachy, that's just stating the facts. Preachy would be saying something like "you all have to convert and see things my way!"

Naturally, I am an omnivore, as are all humans. However, technological advances have allowed us to step a little away from that and rely more on plants. That's happening, slowly, and I think eventually, we'll rely only on plants, and possible include "manufactured" meat. It's hard to try to convert people to not consuming animal products, as we are genetically programmed to desire it.

Religion doesn't help it much either... God said we rule over all animals, etc. (Genesis 1:26) and for us to overtake the earth (Genesis 1:28). To fully kill our meat before eating (Genesis 9:4) and fully cook it before eating (Exodus 12:9).

Hey, it's kinda fun to (mis)interpret the bible to have it say whatever I want it to. ;)

[maestro8]

<threadjack>
"Fundamentalism" in Christianity & Islam (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reac_ter9.htm)
The banner ad staring at me behind phlegm's link had me in stitches:
http://a.as-us.falkag.net/dat/bgf/200510/28/palm_reading_728x90(1).gif

I can just see it now: "Hold your palm against your monitor and click here to continue..."

"Your reading: Your pants and shirt do not match. The next movie you see in a theatre will be terrible. Avoid making left-hand turns for the next week. The "daily special" will give you indigestion. Your bad luck will continue for the next 1,001 lottery tickets. Add more fruits and vegetables to your diet, or you will die sooner than you'd like. Have a nice day!"
</threadjack>

[Gilby]

<threadjack>

The banner ad staring at me behind phlegm's link had me in stitches:
http://a.as-us.falkag.net/dat/bgf/200510/28/palm_reading_728x90%281%29.gif

I can just see it now: "Hold your palm against your monitor and click here to continue..."

"Your reading: Your pants and shirt do not match. The next movie you see in a theatre will be terrible. Avoid making left-hand turns for the next week. The "daily special" will give you indigestion. Your bad luck will continue for the next 1,001 lottery tickets. Add more fruits and vegetables to your diet, or you will die sooner than you'd like. Have a nice day!"
</threadjack>

Buy 1002 lottery tickets. Got it.

[Borges]

<threadjack>

The banner ad staring at me behind phlegm's link had me in stitches:
http://a.as-us.falkag.net/dat/bgf/200510/28/palm_reading_728x90(1).gif


</threadjack>
<threadjack continued>
Thank you for posting that! I've taken the test, and some others at the same site. I now know that I:
1) Naturally display love and sympathy for others (palm)
2) Am extremely self centered (zodiac)
3) Was a penguin in a previous life
4) If cast in a 70's sitcom would be "The girl next door".
5) Need a makeover.
</threadjack>

[BillyTheMountain]

http://www.interfaithcalendar.org/nodeity.htm

This link lists at least 3 religions which believe in No Deity: Buddhism, Jainism and another (could it be Atheism????!)

I cannot make this stuff up!!

Billy

[GILD]

just like the belief in NO UNICORNS.

Can we hear from the Aunicorntheists?????


"Someone Called?" (http://www.invisiblepinkunicorn.com/)

[dudewithasock]

"Someone Called?" (http://www.invisiblepinkunicorn.com/)

...that's just weird.

[GILD]

...that's just weird.
No weirder than most other 'beliefs' (http://www.venganza.org/).

[this end up]

there are many wierd religions out there

[BillyTheMountain]

http://www.interfaithcalendar.org/nodeity.htm

This link lists at least 3 religions which believe in No Deity: Buddhism, Jainism and Atheism.

I cannot make this stuff up!!

Jesus

there are many wierd religions out there

If you lined them all up from most weird to least weird, where would you place the 3 No Deity religions above???

And are they weirder than unicycling?

[BillyTheMountain]

Where the heck is Uzbekistan, the person who started this thread???

PBS special tonight, for those of you in the USA, has Bill Moyer's beginning a series on religion.

Of course, the first to be interviewed is renowned Atheist -- Salman Rushdie. Rushdie organized a conference of writers on the topic of Reason and Religion [not Reason OR Religion].

Rushdie had death threats for writing a book related to Muhammed, so he has experienced the more restrictive impact of bad religion first hand.

Rushdie says no one thinks about GOD more than an Atheist does.

What do you think?

[wobbling bear]

Rushdie says no one thinks about GOD more than an Atheist does.
What do you think?
Not true. I'd rather say that no one feels GOD physical presence more than an Atheist does! -so there is no need to think about it: it's part of our bodily functions like heartbeat or digestion-

[BillyTheMountain]

Not true. I'd rather say that no one feels GOD physical presence more than an Atheist does! -so there is no need to think about it: it's part of our bodily functions like heartbeat or digestion-

I'm not sure what you mean by this:confused:

Here's the bad news for atheists:
http://richarddawkins.net/article,3653,Anti-atheist-prejudice-widespread-in-America,Zac-Smith

Anti-atheist prejudice widespread in America
by Zac Smith
Reposted from:
http://www.oudaily.com/news/2009/mar/11/column-anti-atheist-prejudice-widespread-america/

Americans find atheists a particularly repugnant minority. According to Gallup, they are more disliked than any other major religious group, with the exception of Scientologists.

Research by Gallup also indicates the majority of Americans would not vote for a well-qualified atheistic presidential candidate. Even a gay candidate, the data suggest, would face less formidable discrimination.

But what is it about atheists that makes the American public revile them so intensely?

[hobo_chuck]

I looked through a couple pages of this thread, and all I can say is...


Aaaauuuugggghhh!!!! The stupid-- it burns!

[BillyTheMountain]

Why on earth would anyone read anything but the last post?

[nimblelight]

Not true. I'd rather say that no one feels GOD physical presence more than an Atheist does! -so there is no need to think about it: it's part of our bodily functions like heartbeat or digestion-
So when exactly do I get to feel this presence? I'm sure I felt something during my last bowel movement, but I don't think that was quite it...


But what is it about atheists that makes the American public revile them so intensely?

http://img.moronail.net/img/4/3/643.jpg

Dem atheists... they's just pawns of Satan! They hate God. There is no way that anyone could legitimately disbelieve. I was spoon-fed Jesus with my pulverized apples as a young-un, so I don't know anything else, and clearly nobody else does neither. Even the Devil believes in God. Atheism is a lie. They may call themselves atheists, but that's just one of their tricks to shake your faith.

Ahahahaha! The commoners crack me up.

[Linusk]

I'm an atheist

[MuniOrBust]

Buddha is an atheist too.

[BillyTheMountain]

:D


http://hinduism.about.com/od/gurussaintsofthepast/a/buddha.htm

Buddha, as we know, began his meditation as a Hindu. He was awakened with a new enlightenment only to denounce Hinduism and emerge as the founder of a new religion. Therefore, to understand Buddhism fully, one should not separate it from Hinduism; while at the same time view it separately from Hinduism. Buddha's way of life was "the golden mean" and a relief from the pagan stigmas and caste system prevalent in Hinduism.

The Hindu caste system defined a person's position in society as determined by their birth. Buddha condemned the Hindu caste system and said that it is karma or the good and bad actions of a person and not birth that should determine a person's caste. He introduced the idea of placing morality and equality on a higher place than genealogy of a person.

Jesus had the same relationship to Judaism as Buddha to Hinduism. Both Hinduism and Judaismare ethnic and non-missionary traditions, and are characterised by an element of segregation between the castes and races, unlike Buddhism and Christianity.

[MuniOrBust]

I'm just sayin'.

[BillyTheMountain]

http://www.unicyclist.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[BillyTheMountain]

I. Group Profile

Name: Atheism
Definition: Atheism is
a) the disbelief in the existence of God or any other deity, or
b) the doctrine that there is neither god nor any other deity. (1)
The word comes from two Greek word roots: a , which means "not," and theos , which means "god." (2)

History: Atheism has its roots in both Eastern and Western ancient cultures.While the philosophers of ancient Greece were debating the characteristics of their gods, the Indian Vedas were also questioning the power and origin of the deities of their belief system. These debates, in both cultures, eventually led to questions concerning the actual existence of any gods. These questions did not gain widespread recognizition until much later, however. Atheism as it is known today largely developed in Western culture, and had its first great entrance onto history's philosophical stage during the Enlightenment. (3)
Early Christian thought set some of the groundwork for later atheist arguments. Christian thinkers debated the characteristics of God and tried to prove, through reason, the existence of God and the existence of the Christian idea of God. Anslem, for example, in the Ontological Argument for the Existence of God, argued that God is that which there is nothing greater, and since a real God is greater than an imagined one, then God must exist. Other Christian thinkers did not accept Anselm's reasoning here, but offered other arguments on why God had to exist. Aquinas tried to present God as a "first mover," as one who set the world in motion, and without whom nothing would exist. He argued that objects and their existence proved the existnce of its creator. (4)

Theologians continued to debate similar issues for hundreds of years. Nobody ever proved the existence of God, but many pointed out weaknesses in the theories of their fellow Christians. These exposed weaknesses would later prove to be valuable ammunition for the atheist argument.(5)

During the Enlightenment, emprical knowledge, reason, and the scientific method all had an impact on society. Mankind came to trust only those things that could be tested and studied. Without evidence, a theory was useless. Mankind first applied these processes to science and mathematics. Eventually, people began to use the same processes to posit the question of God's existence. When this eventually occurred, many people decided that not enough evidence existed to support the idea of the existence of a god or supreme being. These people were the first modern atheists. (6)

Some of the great philosophers of the nineteenth century, such as Karl Marx, not only thought that no evidence existed to support the belief in a god, but also believed that religion was a creation of society. They thought that society created religion in order to supress man's desire to seek a good life by promising him a better after-life.(7) Others, like Sigmund Freud, believed that religion was something that comforted people and kept them somewhat in order. (8) With the endorsement of some of the greatest minds of the century, atheism became a notable philosophy of life for the first time in the nineteenth century.

Although atheism has significantly affected religions and society at large since its great popularity in the nineteenth century, atheists consist of only a fraction of each society in the world today. The greatest threat to atheism right now is the discrimination of atheists by members of other religious groups. Much like religious cults and sects, atheism is one of the biggest tests of the U.S. Bill of Rights. An individual's right to freedom of religion must logically include an individual's right to no religion. Even today, society does not seem willing to accept atheists. The Tennessee State Constitution, in violation of its own Bill of Rights, did not allow atheists to hold public office until the 1960s. President Bush was scolded for making the comment that atheists should not be considered citizens of the United States. (9)

Sacred or Revered Texts: According to Tom Kunesh, "Writings by atheists themselves can be classified into three main areas: 1) evidential atheism, or anti-theism, from confirmed anti- religionists like Voltaire and Baron d'Holbach, both of the 18th century; 2) the atheism of suspicion, founded in the critique of religion from the social sciences of economics and psychology promoted by the 19th century luminaries Marx and Freud; and 3) religious atheism, as old as daoism and Buddhism, places atheism within the sphere of the secular world and religious relativism."(10)
Some important atheist texts are:

Selected Anti-Theism Texts

Voltaire, Candide
Selected Critque Of Religion Texts
Sigmund Freud, The Future of an Illusion

Karl Marx, Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Law

Ludwig Feuerbach, Principles of the Philosophy of the Future

Selected Relgious Atheism Texts
Tom Kunesh, The Shaman Atheist: The Dao of Atheism.
Cult or Sect:
Negative sentiments are typically implied when the concepts "cult" and "sect" are employed in popular discourse. Since the Religious Movements Homepage seeks to promote religious tolerance and appreciation of the positive benefits of pluralism and religious diversity in human cultures, we encourage the use of alternative concepts that do not carry implicit negative stereotypes. For a more detailed discussion of both scholarly and popular usage of the concepts "cult" and "sect," please visit our Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect" page, where you will find additional links to related issues.
Size of Group: According to the 1994 World Almanac , there are:
161 million atheists in Asia
56 million atheists in the former USSR
18 million atheists in Europe
3.2 million atheists in Latin America
1.3 million atheists in North America
.5 million atheists in Oceania
.3 million atheists in Africa(11)
for an approximate total of 240.3 million atheists in the world. ( Total from adding 1994 World Almanac figures )
Group Organization: Different atheists follow their beliefs in different ways. Some form or join organizations for atheists, while others do not even associate with other atheists, keeping their beliefs relatively unknown to society. Organizations like American Atheists and Atheists United are engaged in debate about atheist and theological issues, and they seek to promote the rights and beliefs of atheists. [For an update on the disappearance of Madalyn O'Hair in 1995, see this news story on the conviction of Gary Paul Karr on four counts of conspiracy] .
Others join atheist groups that act as a social network, as a group that tries to dissuade others from "blind faith" in religion, or as an ideology/religion in and of itself. Faith Atheism , for example, declares itself to be a "religion," although it does not believe in the existence of any God. Some people participate in and enjoy the ritual and social network of the churches in which they were raised, and yet they do not believe in any god. The only thing that links all atheists together is their common lack of belief in the existence of any god.(12)


| Profile | Beliefs | Related Ideologies | Links | Definitions | Bibliography |

II. Atheist Beliefs/Rationale

All atheists share the common belief in the non-existence of any god or supernatural power. They do not believe that enough substantial evidence exists to prove the existence of God. Some atheists believe that religion is "the opiate of the people," that it makes society worse, and that a popular belief in no God will make society better.(13) They see religion as an institution that divides people, and professes hypocritical and inconsistent doctrine. Other atheists believe that religion serves a positive role in society, but do not believe that it professes the truth.
Some atheists, such as Freud, believe that belief in a god is a result of a common psychologicaldependancy upon a figure who monitors and protects people at all times, much like a parent does with a child. (14)

Feuerbach, considered by many to be the father of modern atheism, believed that God was a mere reflection of mankind back upon itself. He thought that people's beliefs about God reflected what they viewed as good and just. (15)

Science has had a great impact on atheist thinkers. Along with advancements in science came a dependence on reason and logic. Atheism's growing popularity in the nineteenth century was a direct result of this dependence. Many atheists then believed that science, and not religion, would join together all humanity (16).

[olduniman]

Instead of copying great gobs of text from somewhere w/o any credit being given, why not just provide the link?

http://www.geocities.com/mindstuff/atheism.html

[nimblelight]

ooo... I didn't know I followed dogma laid down by Voltaire...


That's awesome. You fail.
Copypasta trolling is cool. Everyone's doing it these days.

Your source:
http://www.geocities.com/mindstuff/atheism.html
# Definition: Atheism is

a) the disbelief in the existence of God or any other deity, or
b) the doctrine that there is neither god nor any other deity. (1)

I have never met an atheist that used the second definition. The second definition on that website is one used only by people who fear what they do not understand, and what they don't understand is anything outside of their own little bubble of faith.

[johnfoss]

I have never met an atheist that used the second definition.I don't take issue with that one. To me that's the one that separates the hardcore atheists from the maybe-agnostic or neutral ones.

The first definition is to not believe, while the second definition is to believe not. That's a fairly significant difference when it comes to stuff like this...

[nimblelight]

Ok, some atheists have used that second definition when talking about other people, but never when talking about themselves.

[BillyTheMountain]

I have never met an atheist that used the second definition. The second definition on that website is one used only by people who fear what they do not understand, and what they don't understand is anything outside of their own little bubble of faith.

Yeah, I'm with John. It seems like you don't even attend atheist religious services! I you did, you would have met plenty!

YOU are the fake atheist, not them! They are the true atheists, the ones with religious conviction.

I'm with John!

[Mikefule]

For most purposes, disbelief in the existence of something is pretty much the same as belief in the non-existence of it.

[hobo_chuck]

For most purposes, disbelief in the existence of something is pretty much the same as belief in the non-existence of it.

Please explain.

I do not have a doctrine of belief in the non-existence of leprechauns... or do I?

[Michaelgoround]

Please explain.

I do not have a doctrine of belief in the non-existence of leprechauns... or do I?
They found a leprechaun (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nda_OSWeyn8) in Mobile, Alabama...

[hobo_chuck]

"Everyone who's seen da leprechaun say aye!"

"Aye!"

I don't have a doctrine of belief in the non-existence of tiny purple aliens that live under the surface of the moon, either.

I just don't believe that they are there.

It's not the same thing.

[Mikefule]

Please explain.

I do not have a doctrine of belief in the non-existence of leprechauns... or do I?

I never mentioned doctrines. However, in its loosest sense, a doctrine is a shared set of assumptions. Atheists share the assumption that there are no gods.

[hobo_chuck]

...so now conclusions are called assumptions?

That totally wrecks standard logic. I have to redefine everything else to compensate.
I'll call assumptions arguments and arguments conclusions.

Never mind.. to make it easier, I'll just use a different language.

[BillyTheMountain]

"Everyone who's seen da leprechaun say aye!"

"Aye!"

I don't have a doctrine of belief in the non-existence of tiny purple aliens that live under the surface of the moon, either.

I just don't believe that they are there.

It's not the same thing.

They are NATIVE to the moon, so on the moon, they are not ALIENS.

They are tiny purple natives.

[johnfoss]

It's highly unlikely that the little purple guys on the moon are from there. I'm going to go with the "aliens" theory. On faith.

[hobo_chuck]

It's highly unlikely that the little purple guys on the moon are from there.

I agree. The basic life that led to the existence of the purple aliens simply could not survive on the Moon. The only reason they can is that they managed to adapt to the conditions as their planet of origin slowly lost its atmosphere.

Some of the machines they use everyday just to exist are amazing.

[Mikefule]

I agree. The basic life that led to the existence of the purple aliens simply could not survive on the Moon.

They're only purple in a certain light.