Atheist bus campaign

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:   http://www.progarchives.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13083   Isn't calling your religious beliefs BULL SH!T a deliberate denigration?

Will you calm down a little? Nobody did.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:   This is the official position of the Pope in an Ex Cathedra document, but the Church considers sex is only for reproductuive purpose inside the marriage and that God created two different sexes to complement, they won't change that because they believe the work of God is perfect.   I may not agree with them about many issues and as a fact i don't in this issue, but I can understand a position that is healthy compared to religious groups that go to gay funerals to praise the Lord for killing a sinner or that attack gays in the streets.   Iván

Anything can look healthy if you compare it to something more extreme. Kim Jong-il's regime in North Korea is "healthier" than Mao ZeDong's was in China.

Now that you also disagree with the Roman Catholic Church, am I allowed to write that I consider their position on sex outside of marriage and homosexuality for the unhealthy, bronzeage bullsh*t I think it is?

Even if you're not offended (or are you?) it may still be offensive to other Roman Catholics, but how am I (Sasquamo, Sean or whoever) supposed to know? I don't think its my problem if you take this as a personal insult, because this isn't one.

...And I don't see how its possible to demand respect for ones who actually thinks this is right. No matter how essential this s to their religious beliefs.

stonebeard wrote: BaldJean wrote: anyway, some people in here people behave as if they could do whatever they want as long as they are not in a religion, which is plain nonsense I believe most accusations of the complete moral vacuum without a God comes from religious people who cannot possibly conceive of morality without someone looking over you and threatening to smite you if you disobey. Naturally, this is the most depraved, sick, unhumaistic, and downright evil conception of morality possible.

I must say, as a somehow hardly-religious person, that's hardly what I think believing in God is all about.

Ricochet wrote: stonebeard wrote: BaldJean wrote: anyway, some people in here people behave as if they could do whatever they want as long as they are not in a religion, which is plain nonsense I believe most accusations of the complete moral vacuum without a God comes from religious people who cannot possibly conceive of morality without someone looking over you and threatening to smite you if you disobey. Naturally, this is the most depraved, sick, unhumaistic, and downright evil conception of morality possible. I must say, as a somehow hardly-religious person, that's hardly what I think believing in God is all about.

If there is to be a belief in an intervening God, that should not be what it is about, true. But when all else fails in keeping the flock in the fold, the fear of Hell is a card that the pastor will surely play.

stonebeard wrote: Ricochet wrote: stonebeard wrote: BaldJean wrote: anyway, some people in here people behave as if they could do whatever they want as long as they are not in a religion, which is plain nonsense I believe most accusations of the complete moral vacuum without a God comes from religious people who cannot possibly conceive of morality without someone looking over you and threatening to smite you if you disobey. Naturally, this is the most depraved, sick, unhumaistic, and downright evil conception of morality possible. I must say, as a somehow hardly-religious person, that's hardly what I think believing in God is all about. If there is to be a belief in an intervening God, that should not be what it is about, true. But when all else fails in keeping the flock in the fold, the fear of Hell is a card that the pastor will surely play.

So will my granny.

This is about people's beliefs, not about what priests/pastors' practices. They play a lot of cards, if so to say, and they can just as well invite you to lead a good, harmonious life, to reflect upon your actions, to discern what's right from what's wrong, to meditation/transcend/interiorize with a prayer or a form of communion with the sacred.

If a pastor only knows to scream and turn his face red while preaching, I'm gonna ignore him, but I'll hardly blame religion or the sacred.

If a friend will say that God blessed us with a sunny, shiny, cloudless day, I'm gonna consider it poetic.

If I'll eventually manage to create a personal bond with the sacred (without accepting its path being seen as a price to pay), I'm sure gonna have a happy life that way.

PS: As I've said earlier, the least I believe in is nothingness. Human judgement being universal, absolute comes next. Most of the times, it proves to be flawed. Thus, the only place I can look is "somewhere else", "somewhere beyond".


Edited by Ricochet - March 18 2009 at 03:00

stonebeard wrote: Well, the point is that after having Hell knocked into their heads a few times, a lot of people don't need the preacher to remind them of the hellfire that awaits them if they screw up, they do it themselves.

Yeah, but screwing up is in people's nature, proven till present time. So there's something call "forgiveness", practiced both by humans and, from what I personally understand, by God himself. It just takes humans to want it, aka ask for it. If you commit an obvious sin/crime and stick to finding it right, it's the same thing, both under human and divine laws.

stonebeard wrote: The problem I have with religions is that I don't see any way to know which one is right, and I'm not convinced atheism only is sufficient for most people (myself included) to be happy. Therefore, I'd rather myself and others just not concern themselves with unverifiable dogma and claims and instead focus on what unites people. Meditation, for one, can universally center oneself, and can be religion-neutral.

If this will make you accomplished, I'm willing, at this point, to say "thumbs up".

Ricochet wrote: As far as it is an avenue for knowing anything spiritually, I dunno. I'm not convinced there is a universal spirit or soul, but humanism, environmentalism, and knowledge of the universe are three things that are most important, and tangible/knowable/achievable for everyone and should be the focus of all humans no matter what.

Well, let's see. Full knowledge of the universe is fully unobtainable. Pure humanism is rare. I don't even know how to relate to environmentalism. Anyway, admiting these are important, it sure won't satisfy me as long as I can clearly not reach them, even up to a mature point.

And I've already said, the other day, replying to someone else, I'm willing to believe in a Creator, because I'm accepting the sacred. But that's just me.


Edited by Ricochet - March 18 2009 at 03:11

BaldJean wrote: Sean, I have already stated that I am not a Christian. I advise you to read what I stated about my beliefs earlier in this post. the existence of a God the way I described "him" (I don't like the pronoun) is a logical necessity for me until someone comes up with an explanation where our consciousness comes from. I stated my opinion about that; once you believe in that you just have to think it through logically to inadvertently arrive at the conclusion that there is something we should call "God". the explanation of God given by me is the central dogma of the religion Friede and I are High Priestesses of, by the way. you have negative feelings towards a certain organized religion because of the way you were brought up. I have perfect understanding for that. but calling people "brainwashed" because they believe in God goes way too far

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Yes jean, it's funny to read how this people who are sworn enemies of religion say they  work toward fostering cooperative diversity   >>> what they clumsily meant is that only channels for religions to co-exists peacefully is through the Atheism and Laïcism currents that should dominate the modern society as to avoid preference of one religion against others.   This one is better, ths Atheist Organization say they don't believe in Commandmente and call them suggestions (in small font    >> again, these guys are non-representative sect that try to build atheism into a religion >>> which proves they understand nothing of atheism.   THE TEN COMMANDMENTS (OF THE ETHICAL ATHEIST) NOTE: Freethought and tolerance obviously prohibit these from being "commandments"!  Just consider them "suggestions". 1.    Thou SHALT NOT believe all thou art told.  >> OK 2.    Thou SHALT seek knowledge and truth constantly. >>> NOPE 3.    Thou SHALT educate thy fellow man in the Laws of Science. >>> really not necessary or even suitable with peole like you around 4.    Thou SHALT NOT forget the atrocities committed in the name of god. >>> but thou shall not omit the atrocities caused by atheists as well. 5.    Thou SHALT leave valuable contributions for future generations. >>> Soooorry, but I don't feel like it , except maybe leaving them a live-able and non-religious planet 6.    Thou SHALT live in peace with thy fellow man.  >>> Isn't that the first requirement of social life??? Nothing new 7.    Thou SHALT live this one life thou hast to its fullest.  >>> now that's atheism!!!!   >> screw promises of an "afterlife" and "paradise" and the fear of "hell" if you don't behave according to Pope Benedictus 8.    Thou SHALT follow a Personal Code of Ethics. >>> just follow the normal don't do to others what you wouldn't want them to apply to you. 9.    Thou SHALT maintain a strict separation between Church and State. >>> which sooo bloooody hazrd to do since the churches are about politics & power 10.  Thou SHALT support those who follow these commandments.  >>> why them support therm more than others???     http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/ten_commandments.html   Who will dare to say they donm't have beliefs, hey they have formal Commandments.  >>> again, these guys are trying stupidly to ratifyatheism, but they don't represent anybody but their own ultra-minority.   Iván

Edited by Sean Trane - March 18 2009 at 05:30

Sean Trane wrote: BaldJean wrote: Sean, I have already stated that I am not a Christian. I advise you to read what I stated about my beliefs earlier in this post. the existence of a God the way I described "him" (I don't like the pronoun) is a logical necessity for me until someone comes up with an explanation where our consciousness comes from. I stated my opinion about that; once you believe in that you just have to think it through logically to inadvertently arrive at the conclusion that there is something we should call "God". the explanation of God given by me is the central dogma of the religion Friede and I are High Priestesses of, by the way. you have negative feelings towards a certain organized religion because of the way you were brought up. I have perfect understanding for that. but calling people "brainwashed" because they believe in God goes way too far     Jean, I remember from previous such arguments about your sect/religion and I do not condemn it (maybe just wondering how you teach your beliefs to your two daughters).      I have negative feelings (and not borne out of my own situatiion, since I was never traumatized >> I even invented faults at confession to "play the we-all-sin-constantly game" and the priest told me I should try to lie invent better sins >> even him wasn't fooled) against most organized religions, because they bring so much troubles in between themselves , even thougfh they p^ray for the same god, but cannot agree on how to worship him, and are ready to wage wars to have reasons  If I don't like religions, it's because of the worshippers, not because there could be a possible (but highly implausible) creator. Should there be a creator (which I never thought there was), why should we worship him? and would this creator want to be worshiped?? >>> if this creator was indeed good , I'd say he would hate to be worshipped by imbecils ready to kill in honour of their own way to pray for him.       You may not like the way "brainwashing" sounds (I told you it was maybe crude but lucid), but as I said it's a very insiduous process and generally perpetrated so you don't realize you're a victim of the brainwashing.   So it may shock you I use thaqt word, but I suggest you (I mean Christians and derivates who might feel ruffled by the "brainwashing" epithet) open your eyes, step a few feet back , leave your beliefs/supersititions aside for a few seconds and look at the full picture with a new eye     As for your rebuffal of not being born atheists, why is it that most religions have a ceremony (baptism, circoncision) a few days after birth as to lay a claim on him ASAP??? If that's not a proiof that the baby is born free, and then captured by a religion,.......

Sean, you are twisting this completely, and especially your last argument is not valid. the practice of quick baptizing has historical reasons; do you have any idea how high the death rate was (and in many countries still is) among newborn? this is the historical reason for quick baptizing; it has become a tradition in our culture.
since you don't know my personal history you should rather refrain from giving me advice about stepping back and leaving my superstitions behind. first of all they are not superstitions, second they have close to nothing to do with my childhood. my mother was Irish and a Roman catholic, but my parents also were hippies, and the only person who told me about religion was my grandma on my mother's side. she also told me about the little folk, by the way, or pixies, as some call them.
as it is with many founders of a religion, my belief is based on a mythical experience, only with us it is an experience two people had. one morning Friede showed me a poem she had just written. I read it, and my mouth dropped open. I asked her why she had written it, and she said it wqas based on a dream she had had the night before. the amazing thing is: I had had the same dream! if you are curious I can send you the poem wikth a rough translation (it is in German).
when sujch a thing happens you give it significance, and that was the birth of our religion. we had both not been religiously active at all in any way before, apart from taking part in the usual festivities of the Christian religion which have become part of our culture.
to believe in God the way I believe you just have to ask the question: where does our consciousness come from? it is a qestion scientists have not been able to answer yet, and it is a widespread belief among scientists of the human brain that we will never know. my answer is that once a process, like the process which iks going on in our brains, is sufficiently complex it develops a consciousness.
since the universe is definitely "sufficiently complex" it should have a consciousness too. we do, however, not worship the universal consciousness directly, because we think it is impossible to grasp, so we worship a minor aspect of it: Gaia, the Goddess of the Earth. we see the effects of her every day.
by the way: the Gaia hypoothesis of James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis is seriously being discussed by scientists, so it is anything but a superstitious belief

Trouserpress wrote: progismylife wrote: 1) I find it amusing that they don't have the balls to say there is no God. Sadly it's not a matter of "having the balls" to say it or not but rather simply to avoid the campaign getting pulled by the advertising standards authority. Because it cannot be scientifically proven that there is no god they cannot claim it in an advertisement. I agree it does rather weaken the point they're trying to make, though. And yes, speaking as an atheist myself, I find the whole campaign really quite annoying. It's smug, patronising and a terrible waste of money.