I don't want this to be a chance for you to tell me what is wrong with the theocratic abscess burrowed; the thorn in your side or the vacant imperfection imposed upon the resident scapegoat. I care not to afford you the opportunity to lick your wounds in my sight or to appease the cultural norms subscribed.

Without the fear on the other side of the fence nor the ruckus in the alley way I want you to tell me what the benefit of an atheist lifestyle is had the social and political majority not absolved you and the necessary protestation of that artificial insemination had manifested itself in hindsight.

In other words, had there been no myth where would you see yourself rather than where would you see yourself in light of it.

Views: 3075

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Of course one can  sacrifice them with either a 22 rifloe at range or by playing a clarinet so badly the high pitched squeals make them explode (Altissimo D works wonders).  No need to catch them, then.

jared, I agree, any tool can be a weapon depending on how you use it.

Use the word "atheism" with the words of religion ("must" and "cannot" to name but two) and atheism can serve purposes similar to those of religion.

Use the word "atheism" with the words of religion ("must" and "cannot" to name but two) and atheism can serve purposes similar to those of religion.

Please provide an example. 


Words of religion: (archaic) thou shalt, thou shalt not; (modern) must, cannot.

Habits die slowly and some formerly-religious atheists still use those words of religion.

I'm still not quite clear on your point or if there is a low swinging branch that I'm suppose to be walking into.

 I'm trying to picture me (formerly) religious walking into a gas station, saying "Thou shalt give me $20 on pump ten." It's not working.

 I guess I wonder if there is something specifically in this post that you are referring to or if it's just a general statement.

NM I think I see what you were getting at now Tom. ;)

Jared, I agree; I need to stop using such general terms.

Let's exit the commercial scene before the clerk calls her/his manager, or the police, and says "I have a weirdo here and he's shouting at me."

Let's enter a moral scene. Let's also skip the shalting (it dates from ancient times) and choose from many things a Catholic nun might tell a schoolkid: "You must go to Mass every Sunday!" Or let's choose from many things a priest might tell teenagers: "Married Catholics cannot use birth control!"

I heard twelve years of that kind of language, and when I got out into the world I had to learn less authoritarian ways to influence others to do what I wanted them to do.

I tried idealism and said stuff like "People should..." and "People should not...."

That too failed and I tried assertiveness: "I want you to...." or "I don't want you to...."

It worked more often, but not as often as I wanted. Little was left but democracy: "If I do X, will you do Y?"

Quitting Catholicism required me to do more than stay away; I had to change the way I spoke.

Damnit! Every time I read your name I read it Tom Selleck.

RE: "Isn't it a belief in something, hence a form, though inverted, of the original form of this belief?"

Only if bald is an inverted form of hair color.

Patrick, in your words (It's true that for atheists the belief in the divinity is non existent, as you put it. However, what can we say about this particular kind of belief in something that does not exist? Isn't it a belief in something, hence a form, though inverted, of the original form of this belief?), I'm seeing traces of Plato's idea that to say X is proof of X.

The Catholic Church picked up that idea and used it to burn witches (saying "she's a witch" was evidence that that she is a witch, hence she is guilty and should burn.

If god/religion had never been invented I wouldn't have to think about it at all. Also there would be no need to identify myself as Atheist. I would be a pedestrian. ;P

 Remember the god "magolotonicatronicon" from my former post? The one that I made up on the spot and that you never had to consider pryer? But since I did bring this god up to you did it create a new belief for you?

 Sure you can say "I do no believe that "magolotonicatronicon" exists" but this implies possibility. Now to say that it's possible you have to consider a few things first. Aside from the authority on the matter you have to take into consideration that somewhere out there there is an english speaking god that has identified himself to me via revelation as "magolotonicatronicon" and that he wants SteveinCo to sacrifice ground squirrels in his almighty, holy, squirrely-ass, name.

 Do you think it's possible? If you answer "Yes. It is possible." then you are just being difficult. I'll also say that it depends on ones interpretation of "god" in order to establish possibility. Is it the seeping of "something from nothing" that Lawrence Krauss talks about? If so It still doesn't do us any good to call it "god".

 I might add that due to whats possible your argument is valid however there is a huge difference between "Valid" and "Sound". First we must establish that there is a god to not believe in.

I have been a confirmed Amagolotonicatroniconist for some minutes now. :)

Does anyone want to join my new group:

Think Amagolotonicatroniconist

We are going to put those Magolonicatroniconists in their place.



Religion Virus

Services we love!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service