For starters, I’m an agnostic (pretty close to atheist), I don’t really have any thoughts on whether a God exists or not. I do however, have some thoughts on how this…”battle” between Atheism and Religion seems to be shaping out. I have many friends who are both atheist and religious, but almost all of them believe what they believe because they have researched their beliefs (to one degree or another) and have a decently solid basis for it. Now, it’s a well-known fact that most people are religious because their parents were, and they grew up with religion. With atheists, it’s quite a different story. Let me get to the point…
It saddens me to say this, but it seems like more and more atheists, especially internet atheists, are simply “converting” to atheism either because they hate religion (most notably Christianity) or are attracted by a lifestyle where the only rules of morality are the ones they themselves create. Whether they actually believe what they say they do, (or rather, disbelieve), is an issue that is put on the backburner. I feel that many of modern atheists simply accept disbelief of God on the basis of simple arguments, all too willingly, motivated mostly by their desire to be “free” of religion and its “restraints”. This growing propensity seems to be bolstered by the fact that many atheists (especially those on the internet (i.e. r/atheism) will openly support religions like Satanism, if only to piss of Christians. As I wandered from one atheist internet forum to another, I didn’t see any intellectual threads talking about something of value, such as “Why I choose to believe/disbelieve.” Instead, I saw scores and scores of threads discussing such topics as “The War on Christmas” and “The ignorance of Christians” and of course, the textbook “THINK OF THE HOMOSEXUALS” (Boo fucking hoo).
This trend has grown to such a degree that, to many people, atheism doesn’t mean “disbelief in God” or “disbelief in religion” anymore, as it should, but more markedly, “anti-religion”. People have literally come to equate atheism with liberalism, where the only form of morality is the Golden Rule and anything that is related to religion in anyway is evil. People have come to believe that being an atheist is simply giving yourself a license to do whatever you want (similar to the video below)
Nothing could be farther from the truth. As I said before, I am an agnostic with atheistic tendencies. However, I do not condone drinking, drugs, fornication, cursing, or (and I don’t care if this offends anyone) the practice of homosexuality. I condemn these things on a scientific basis. Jared Taylor, one of the foremost advocates of the far-right community, and a staunch atheist himself, holds the same set of moral (or as I call them, efficient) values.
I sincerely believe that this growing delusion that atheism = liberalism, that atheism = license, or that atheism = freedom (from more than just religion) flies in the face of the facts. Again, more and more people seem to be becoming atheists simply because they downright despise religion or are attracted by the idea of a life without any rules, where they can be “chill” and “nice” to everyone. This growing fad has left the atheist community with a shortage of real intellectuals who seek truth rather than license, and leaves us instead with the rabid, seething masses of ignorance, such as the kind that breeds at r/atheism. “I WANT TO DO WHAT I WANT WITH MY BODY, BREAK THE CHAINS OF STUPID RELIGION, FREE THE SEXUALLY AND THE PHYSICALLY REPRESSED, DOWN WITH THE OLIGARCHY” This is not atheism, this is barbarism and primitive, devolved man, seeking to gratify base desires and drag down society with him and using atheism/relativism as a shield to deflect all criticism and attack opponents with impunity.
That being said, I feel that atheism is being abused in modern society, our community has become starved for real intellectuals and filled to the brim with neck-bearded anti-religious whack jobs seeking to gain a vantage point so that they can unload their vengeance upon society for “holding them back”. And frankly, I’m tired of it.
Annnndd the stereotype of the online atheist never fails to confirm itself...yet again...And I wonder why I find religious people more appeasing to hang around, even though I don't agree with them on the subject of God's existence.
Is it really fornication if you're married, though? I suppose it depends on definitions.
I'm off for a beer and a joint, before grabbing my lesbian wife for a bit of homosexual fornication.
And I hope all of it was spectacularly happy making for the two of you. Maybe Nate's head will explode with "I will not condone."
I disagree with a lot of people here on a lot of issues. I came to this post hoping I'd find a kindred soul, BUT instead I found someone who disagrees with a lot of people here on a lot of issues... but those are the very issues I have no issue with. So with Nate8080 I see the worst of both worlds.
It saddens me to say this, but it seems like more and more atheists, especially internet atheists, are simply “converting” to atheism either because they hate religion (most notably Christianity) or are attracted by a lifestyle where the only rules of morality are the ones they themselves create.
If you blindly (through "faith") accept rules of morality simply because they come along with the package of your religion, excuse me, but what is moral about that?
Nothing, and in fact, I have often told religious people, "If you believe something is wrong merely because God or the Bible says so, you are actually insulting your own God, since you are indirectly insinuating that he/she is a tyrant and makes laws that have no scientific basis."
So, how does one adopt a morality, then, if not as a decision of some sort? And what is the basic difference between that sort of decision and making rational choices as one goes along.
In other words, whatever one does, be it based on thinking (ethics) or following a set of rules (morality) still is a choice either way.
Well, for starters, I think most people would agree that whatever leads to a healthy, more efficient society, could be construed as "good" or "moral", and whatever does not, could be construed as "bad" or "immoral". Thus we have a basis.
And you assume that people making considered thought-out choices vs following a list of prescriptions is bad? Why?
You decry people make considered choices (who create their own morality, to use your words). What does that leave you? It leaves you following someone/something else's prescriptive morality, does it not?
In other words, the alternative to people creating their own reality is to become slave to a list of dos and don'ts from an external source.
Do you get my point, now?