Hello fellow non-believers!

I am new to TA but the question I pose is certainly not a fresh one: Can Atheists and Theists co-exist?

We all know that historically Theists and other Theists cannot co-exist peacefully. War and violence in the name of Religion has been widespread over the entirety of human existence, but it has to be said that civility between believers and non-believers in the modern age has been commonplace. Formal (mostly amicable) debates and the agreement on separation of church and state have somewhat proven this theory, right?

Do the majority of Atheists really strive for a world of empty churches, bible burning and the end of religion forever? Maybe some of us do, just as many Theists probably pray for the conversion of all Atheists to Theism.

What can we realistically hope to achieve as Atheists, and in your opinion is it possible to co-exist with the believers?

I'll leave you with some interesting quotes -

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
  - Criss Jami

"I'm noticing an exciting trend around the country: a resurgence of interest in Christian apologetics (the defense of the faith). This is a reaction to the current attacks on the essentials of Christianity that are coming from militant atheists, radical professors, and Internet gadflies."

- Lee Strobel

"I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world."

- Richard Dawkins

"Religion is part of the human make-up. It's also part of our cultural and intellectual history. Religion was our first attempt at literature, the texts, our first attempt at cosmology, making sense of where we are in the universe, our first attempt at health care, believing in faith healing, our first attempt at philosophy."

- Christopher Hitchens

Tags: argue, atheism, co-existence, debate, religion, society, theism, war

Views: 1553

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Is that a statement of fact, or a question? See, how it works, is that statements of fact generally end in periods ("."), whereas questions usually end in question marks ("?").

I was feeding my interpretation of her belief back to her. Not a question; a statement.

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”  - Criss Jami

Rubbish. The atheist rejects the theist's claim that God exists. That's all. If someone says he is an atheist, you know nothing about what he believes. You know exactly one thing he does notbelieve. Anything beyond that is an intellectually dishonest assumption.

I'm an atheist. I don't claim to know the answers. That is the exclusive claim of theists.

I only know what science has revealed: the universe probably originated from a multiverse which exists in every possible state at once and thus without time. That is eternity, which has no beginning, and requires no creation event.

This is one important reason why theists and atheists cannot co-exist: endless encounters with theists who tell me what I believe rather than askme. But it's not the most important reason.

The theist and atheist cannot co-exist in much of the world because the theist will saw your head off with a dull sword if he knows you don't believe.

(Warning: This GRAPHIC video is not for the squeamish.)
[moderator]Not Safe for Work - Article contains footage of a man being decapitated.[/moderator]

Atheists accept that the universe wasn't a creation be it by a magical person or anything else with a mind.

BTW, I won't watch that video on the possibility I might see someone's head sawed off. if that's what's there, my feeling is that the post should be removed and reposted minus the video.

As much as it pains me to agree with you, I didn't watch it either, for the same reason. I don't agree it should be removed, as watching it is free choice - I chose not to watch.


I added the warning so you could choose for yourself whether or not to watch. The choice of removal is up to the forum moderators. I'll respect their choice, however, I will add that this video is acceptable under the Terms of Service document.

"Additionally, you agree not to [...] Post any content that depicts or contains rape, extreme violence, murder, bestiality, incest, or other similar content."

That's the legalese from the Terms of Service. Murder, by the same legalese, is an illegal killing. The video depicts the legal execution of an apostate under Tunisian law. It's not a murder. It's God's work.

If the terms of service are that strictly enforced here, then posting content that depicts common religious practices and themes-- such as the torture, crucifixion, and death of Jesus Christ-- are also banned from the site. And they're not. Or are they?

I haven't watched it, but if it does depict an actual (not simulated) beheading, then I don't know how it doesn't violate the prohibition against extreme violence. There's a difference between actuality and simulation.

Let's remember that some members are underage. In that case the "voluntary" aspect is meaningless and moot.

The Terms of Service make no distinction between the actual and the simulated. If the 'Tunisian Apostate Execution' video is disallowed due to extreme violence, then so is 'The Passion of the Christ" video and this Matthias Grunewald painting of the crucifixion. The latter two are the most extremely violent of the three.
I would hope ThinkAtheist does not restrict its adult memberships to standards appropriate for underage children. I sure didn't see any signs posted to that effect when I joined up.
It's unreasonable for me to hold the Internet-using public responsible for what my child sees online. I am responsible for what my child sees. So I use OpenDNS FamilyShield as a nanny. I highly recommend other parents do the same for their children. It's easy and free of charge.
I posted the video to demonstrate a point. But I'm not so attached that I can't live without it. Nevertheless, it's up there now, and I can't remove it even if I wanted to. It's in the moderator's hands now.

Of course you can, GM - you and I both know there's a little "x," visible only to you, in the upper right corner of your comment. All you need to do is highlight your text, copy it, click the "x." deleting your comment, then paste your comment, sans the video, into a new comment box.

I've already stated I don't believe you need to do so, but don't pretend you can't.

"I've already stated I don't believe you need to do so, but don't pretend you can't."

That was ignorance not pretense. I had no idea what the little 'x' button was until you just now explained. I stand corrected and hereby own it fully: I did say "even if I wanted to" remove it. And I don't, so I'm not. It's still up to the moderators. Thanks for setting me straight, Arch.

No problem, GM - I don't want to watch it, but I'm not judging you, and I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to censorship!

I edited the post to change the embedded video to a hyperlink to the article containing the video. This is an ad hoc judgment call.

A few things should be noted:

  • The terms of service are generic terms of service for Ning. It is not the creation of Think Atheist, and the scope of moderation is not strictly governed by it. Ning is likely trying to limit its responsibility for content which is exploitive in nature. 
  • The TA moderators try to uphold the Terms of Service, but we cannot not treat it as a sticky web of technicalities. No set of rules governing human conduct can perfectly cover every conceivable context or every shade of grey. Technically a number of Bugs Bunny cartoons could fall under 'extreme violence' if we wanted to get that rigorous. The only way to be perfectly consistent is to embrace the extremes of restrictiveness or permissiveness.
  • I removed the embedded video because it fits easily within the NSFW range. While 'NSFW' also introduces something subjective, I think in this case it is not such a difficult call. The general tone of this site is that the content is safe for work (or other comparable scenarios).
  • I retained a link for two reasons. I assume the aim was to be informative rather than to exploit the death of another human being. As gruesome as the video is, it represents an aspect of reality. I'll leave it to members if they want to access this publicly available material. This is discretionary. I cannot vouch that all moderators share my view unless you want me to put it up for discussion in the moderator's forum.

I have made this comment in this thread because the issue was visible to that same extent; however, further comments on the issue should be directed toward the moderators or to the feedback feature of the site.


Services we love!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service