The Atheist - Agnostic - Non religious thread

King By-Tor wrote: I find it funny that the atheists opened this discussion as a topic to chat and the religious folk have crusaded our asses and turned it into a huge debate. You guys are silly with your opinions which you hold as fact - at least we don't go door to door saying, "hi, have you found faith in life and no longer have need for an idol which to fear and give thanks to? Let me tell you about Atheism."

Leningrad wrote: BUDDHISM IS NOT A RELIGION

I've heard it referred to as Asian Atheism... but then that starts the regurgitation of that old slippery slope.... starting at that beginning, can you really call Atheism a religion?  It's more like an anti-religion;  but not necessarily an inversion of Religion (like some forms of satanism can be).  I like to think that "religions" have to have two basic things:  A recognized text with universally (within that religion) accepted tenants, and a building in which many come to worship together, and enough followers to make it internationally recognized as a system of thought that is not fringe or cult-like.  Last time I checked, Atheist churches only existed in the universe of Metalocalypse.    Buddhism may have its temples, but really aren't they just places to have silence away from the noise pollution of life (otherwise)?  Isn't that what any temple is?  So it follows by my definition (with the three ideas behind it- but granted my definition should not necessarily be accepted as an Objective truth), that Buddhism is a religion.... even though it (paradoxically it may seem) has been referred to as Atheism (by some).  Once again I would like to advise freedom of thought above all else.....  any religion can be defined differently for individuals (and what it does for them).  If there was a church for the worship of RIO and Avant Garde, I would most likely attend, provided that no gods came into the picture, just the absorption of the music... and maybe even a church band of improvisers!  But you could call that a specific music hall rather than a church, really....


Edited by avalanchemaster - June 06 2009 at 21:37

Jedi is a religion these days.




I find it funny that the atheists opened this discussion as a topic to chat and the religious folk have crusaded our asses and turned it into a huge debate. You guys are silly with your opinions which you hold as fact - at least we don't go door to door saying, "hi, have you found faith in life and no longer have need for an idol which to fear and give thanks to? Let me tell you about Atheism."

King By-Tor wrote: SergiUriah wrote: Do atheists say: "Oh, my God!"?, or that exclamation set phrase is prohibited for them? we say, "Oh my science!"

That would be interesting to actually hear someone use that.

avalanchemaster wrote: Ha!  open to interpretation I suppose, but none of my posts have been intended as trolling.  But I could interpret your actions as such if I wanted.....

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - June 06 2009 at 21:30

avalanchemaster wrote: MovingPictures07 wrote: SergiUriah wrote: Do atheists say: "Oh, my God!"?, or that exclamation set phrase is prohibited for them? It's not prohibited. I say it occasionally. Last time I checked, there was no similarity among atheists and I often don't even call myself an atheist; I just choose not to involve myself with religion. If I had to label myself, however, I would definitely be an atheist. Atheism does not have a structure. There are always people in every stream of thought who take it as a personal challenge to try to "prove" that they're right to everyone else constantly, and I know many religious and non-religious people who are like that. The whole debate on the previous pages of whether atheism is "structured" or not is completely pointless; everything needs to be taken on a completely individualist level when it comes to atheism, and even when it comes to religion. In the end, even if one person is restricting their spiritual beliefs to a certain set of values (say: Buddhist, Catholic, whatever), each person has their own thoughts and beliefs on every matter---there is just more variation in atheism and non-religious people than religious because they're not restricting themselves to a set of faith-based beliefs in some way. There is a general consensus when it comes to any "label" or religion, but I doubt you'll find that every Catholic agrees with each other on every issue concerning anything spiritual, or likewise anywhere else. It's even less likely that you'll find that "atheists" agree with one another, because there's hardly anything to discuss. I am a firm believer in the rejection of organized religion--I'm much more comfortable with the idea of people expressing their religions on a completely individualistic basis, but never would I consider forcing or imposing that idea on anyone else, since they're allowed to do what they want. Movingpictures07, I agree with almost all that you have to say; except one aspect:  I think Buddhism, while having basic tenants or aspects shared by most who call themselves Buddhist, it is still largely open to interpretation, just like interpretation of any other organized movement should be.  I like many ideas in buddhism, but do not follow any rigorous practice that I would call strictly Buddhist per se.... Moreso, I like the idea that through meditation (or carefully watching thoughts go by and interpreting the nonsense of it) one can help to ascertain a certain control over one's self.  That's true. I would say Buddhism is the most easily open-to-interpretation of the established/organized "religions", but I was just thinking of the first examples that came to my mind. I agree with you in that I like the ideas of Buddhism the most of any organized sets for that reason. I do not subscibe to any fundamental Atheistic views (I really think some people here are really stretching to show atheism as a religion here).  But I feel a kinship to many atheists... however, I like my atheists (and anybody else for that matter) to be independent thinkers.  What good is structure if it cannot be broken and revised?   What good is thought and will if it is not free (of dogma and tyranny of thought control)? I agree entirely with that. I typically avoid labels or "groupings" of any kind, for that reason. It's easy for people to get locked into patterns of thinking.

KoS wrote: SergiUriah wrote: Do atheists say: "Oh, my God!"?, or that exclamation set phrase is prohibited for them? Yes. I also say "Jesus Christ" "Jesus effin' Christ"  and various other violations of the Commandment explicitly forbidding that language.

I only take the Lord's name in vain whenever I see commercials hawking religious crap or televangelists when channel surfing.  I'm pretty sure God will forgive me.

MovingPictures07 wrote: SergiUriah wrote: Do atheists say: "Oh, my God!"?, or that exclamation set phrase is prohibited for them? It's not prohibited. I say it occasionally. Last time I checked, there was no similarity among atheists and I often don't even call myself an atheist; I just choose not to involve myself with religion. If I had to label myself, however, I would definitely be an atheist. Atheism does not have a structure. There are always people in every stream of thought who take it as a personal challenge to try to "prove" that they're right to everyone else constantly, and I know many religious and non-religious people who are like that. The whole debate on the previous pages of whether atheism is "structured" or not is completely pointless; everything needs to be taken on a completely individualist level when it comes to atheism, and even when it comes to religion. In the end, even if one person is restricting their spiritual beliefs to a certain set of values (say: Buddhist, Catholic, whatever), each person has their own thoughts and beliefs on every matter---there is just more variation in atheism and non-religious people than religious because they're not restricting themselves to a set of faith-based beliefs in some way. There is a general consensus when it comes to any "label" or religion, but I doubt you'll find that every Catholic agrees with each other on every issue concerning anything spiritual, or likewise anywhere else. It's even less likely that you'll find that "atheists" agree with one another, because there's hardly anything to discuss. I am a firm believer in the rejection of organized religion--I'm much more comfortable with the idea of people expressing their religions on a completely individualistic basis, but never would I consider forcing or imposing that idea on anyone else, since they're allowed to do what they want.

Movingpictures07, I agree with almost all that you have to say; except one aspect:  I think Buddhism, while having basic tenants or aspects shared by most who call themselves Buddhist, it is still largely open to interpretation, just like interpretation of any other organized movement should be.  I like many ideas in buddhism, but do not follow any rigorous practice that I would call strictly Buddhist per se.... Moreso, I like the idea that through meditation (or carefully watching thoughts go by and interpreting the nonsense of it) one can help to ascertain a certain control over one's self. 

I do not subscibe to any fundamental Atheistic views (I really think some people here are really stretching to show atheism as a religion here).  But I feel a kinship to many atheists... however, I like my atheists (and anybody else for that matter) to be independent thinkers.  What good is structure if it cannot be broken and revised?   What good is thought and will if it is not free (of dogma and tyranny of thought control)?

....keep it civil Avalanchemaster, your viewpoints on the subject are most enlightening, let's not dumb down the debate with personal attacks, even unintentionally. You have much to share.

SergiUriah wrote: Do atheists say: "Oh, my God!"?, or that exclamation set phrase is prohibited for them?

It's not prohibited. I say it occasionally.

Last time I checked, there was no similarity among atheists and I often don't even call myself an atheist; I just choose not to involve myself with religion. If I had to label myself, however, I would definitely be an atheist.

Atheism does not have a structure. There are always people in every stream of thought who take it as a personal challenge to try to "prove" that they're right to everyone else constantly, and I know many religious and non-religious people who are like that.

The whole debate on the previous pages of whether atheism is "structured" or not is completely pointless; everything needs to be taken on a completely individualist level when it comes to atheism, and even when it comes to religion. In the end, even if one person is restricting their spiritual beliefs to a certain set of values (say: Buddhist, Catholic, whatever), each person has their own thoughts and beliefs on every matter---there is just more variation in atheism and non-religious people than religious because they're not restricting themselves to a set of faith-based beliefs in some way.

There is a general consensus when it comes to any "label" or religion, but I doubt you'll find that every Catholic agrees with each other on every issue concerning anything spiritual, or likewise anywhere else. It's even less likely that you'll find that "atheists" agree with one another, because there's hardly anything to discuss.

I am a firm believer in the rejection of organized religion--I'm much more comfortable with the idea of people expressing their religions on a completely individualistic basis, but never would I consider forcing or imposing that idea on anyone else, since they're allowed to do what they want.