Thread: Respect vs. Blasphemy

Originally Posted by Alembic

An atheist says "separation of church and state". They do not want a Christian philosophy determining law. And yet, how would they not use an atheist philosophy to determine law?

Well that's not really separation of church and state. Atheists just don't
want religion promoted by the government. Like teaching creationism in public schools. Atheists would be against a law that said every citizen had to go to church on Sunday or face a fine. Though of course it's not just atheists that support the idea of separation of church and state.

But just because the bible says 'thou shalt not kill' I really doubt any atheist would have a problem with a law based from that.

And what is the 'atheist philosophy'? I don't see how one could use that
in determining a law.

Originally Posted by Alembic

Religion is a philosophy. And everyone has a philosophy whether they call it that or not. Philosophy, being a group of stated principals, beliefs, logical and illogical conclusion, axioms and experiences have relevance to the holder of the philosophy. A person's philosophy therefore drives behaviors, decisions, emotions, responses, etc. So, in my view, atheism or any other ism is not a presence or absence of religion. If you have a philosophy, and everyone does, then you have a religion. Just not the same religion

To me it looks that you got my point here. Comparing religion to philosophy is something that religious people rarely or never do. Not many understand or are willing to understand it this way.

How does Atheism dictate ones motive and direction?

My answer still is it is not just Atheism (or Religion)that dictates motive and direction but the make up of all that is us. Place 2 people with the same background, school experience, ect in the same situation but one is Atheist and one Christian. Give them the the same problem to answer and even if they come to the same conclusion they will come to it from different directions because of the difference in what they hold as truth.

You don't need a belief in Christ to help others. Or a belief in a god.
Empathy is all that's needed.

I did. The reason is on another post too long to go through again here. http://straightrazorpalace.com/conve...tml#post519065

What percentage of this profession are non-theists?

These numbers are from membership roles. That means that 100% of those (80 +20) in this statistic are suppose to be Christian. (Faith without works is dead.)

The rest of your post has either been answered by others or is 'holier than thou' non sequitur.

Thank you I am called to be Holy so to me that is a complement but it is not I but Christ who lives within me. Only parts of my post have been attempted to be answered by others. The part I am still wondering about is this : Xman you said

A belief is not quite the same thing as a position about them.

To which I replied:

What, You hold your position without belief in it? I don't think so.

To which you replied:

Think again.

So I asked:

Ok, so you do not believe in the position where you stand. So what do you believe in? Nothing?

So What is your position?

Originally Posted by NYCshaver

Well that's not really separation of church and state. Atheists just don't
want religion promoted by the government. Like teaching creationism in public schools. Atheists would be against a law that said every citizen had to go to church on Sunday or face a fine. Though of course it's not just atheists that support the idea of separation of church and state.

But just because the bible says 'thou shalt not kill' I really doubt any atheist would have a problem with a law based from that.

And what is the 'atheist philosophy'? I don't see how one could use that
in determining a law.

Understand that I have debated this arugument from both sides. I have been an atheist. And, of course the worst kind because I was actively trying to convert others to atheism.

If I were asked what is an atheist. I would first state "someone who does not believe in god". Then someone would ask "then where do your moral beliefs come from?" And then I would have to describe my philospohical beliefs in detail to explain what I did believe in and why I believed it. By the end of the conversation, I had described a personal religion. If you are an atheist, I have no idea what your personal philosophy is or from where you derived your morality. But if you were an elected official, I believe you would use it to formulate your decisions. I have yet to meet the person that can keep their motives that pure that some of their personal philosophy does not enter into their decisions.

Separation of church and state? My personal feeling is that it is not possible. The only thing that is possible is to change the definition of church to obfuscate that it is being used to direct the state.

Cynical yes, but I believe it to be the truth.

Originally Posted by ENUF2

My answer still is it is not just Atheism (or Religion)that dictates motive and direction but the make up of all that is us.

This is what you said earlier about atheism:

Originally Posted by ENUF2

Quote:
Originally Posted by ENUF2
It is not Religion in a Corporate sense but it is a personal belief system which dictates ones motive and direction.

So if you can't answer how atheism dictates ones motive and direction then the statement you made above about atheism isn't valid.

It's not a personal belief system. It's just a lack of belief.

Gentlemen, and ladies too.

Once again we seem to have a thread that has turned from simple and intelligent question into yes-no headbanging tournament. Of course it is only positive if, during conversation, new questions rise to steer us into undiscovered paths of new assessments and comprehensions.

Personally, as an atheist, do not care if people are willing to call my personal opinion as a philosophy or religion. Couldn't care less. I have nothing to proof or disproof. The existence of Christian God is as possible as is with Ukko, one of our ancient gods. I do not believe in them, but i can't proof they wouldn't exist. I do not care to try to proof such thing, which to me is beyond sensible thinking. This is how i see and won't change my opinion until i personally see Ukko throwing thunderbolts from the sky. You have right to believe whatever you want. Some people believe dogs are better than cats, or vice-versa, and some people believe that Elvis isn't dead, but rather working as a bus driver in Masku about 30 km north of Turku here in Finland.

Xmans original question was about respecting religious demands. I think we get a better conversation sticking with it.

Edit: addendum. I think alembic put it the way i see:

Originally Posted by Alembic

Now, here is my answer to respecting religions. As others have stated on this thread, I have to see the resulting behaviors from the religion to know if I respect it.

Based on what i've seen and learned, i have no reason to feel comfortable when people around tell you they know the one and only truth.
The way is see the world, and put myself into it is that people are capable of doing good and bad. Religion is a good excuse to get behind and hide when doing both good or bad things. Just my personal 2c.

Originally Posted by ENUF2

So What is your position?

My beliefs include, but are not limited to this and this.

Originally Posted by Sailor

Gentlemen, and ladies too.

Once again we seem to have a thread that has turned from simple and intelligent question into yes-no headbanging tournament. Of course it is only positive if, during conversation, new questions rise to steer us into undiscovered paths of new assessments and comprehensions.

Personally, as an atheist, do not care if people are willing to call my personal opinion as a philosophy or religion. Couldn't care less. I have nothing to proof or disproof. The existence of Christian God is as possible as is with Ukko, one of our ancient gods. I do not believe in them, but i can't proof they wouldn't exist. I do not care to try to proof such thing, which to me is beyond sensible thinking. This is how i see and won't change my opinion until i personally see Ukko throwing thunderbolts from the sky. You have right to believe whatever you want. Some people believe dogs are better than cats, or vice-versa, and some people believe that Elvis isn't dead, but rather working as a bus driver in Masku about 30 km north of Turku here in Finland.

Xmans original question was about respecting religious demands. I think we get a better conversation sticking with it.

I agree. However, it's near impossible in my opinion when people have their religion described as being dangerous and unworthy of respect. When a core belief is attacked, it is unreasonable to expect such civility as we would like.

Saying something like, "your deeply held faith is unworthy of respect" is not a way to conduct a rational discussion, IMHO. Calling religion dangerous is not either. I find it supercilious and specious at best.

I respect atheists, but find it unreasonable based on all of the coincidences and pure luck that their explanations rely on. I'm OK with not having empirical evidence of every thing I see and feel. Why my religion isn't respectable is something that I don't quite get. Of course, I'm in the majority here and I'm guessing some of the condescension is in part a defense mechanism. I mean some describe it as being "Rationalist" which by implication means religious people are irrational...

So, unworthy of respect, dangerous, and irrational are not things that foster coolheaded discussion of high minded ideals. $.02

The thread question is about 'religion', and religion is not a 'philosophy' or a belief that you have, religion is something that you 'DO', a philosophy or belief without action is vain or worthless. A person is or can be 'religious', but what they actually do is what determines the value of that man's religion, hypocrites are often very 'religious'.

Originally Posted by richmondesi

I agree. However, it's near impossible in my opinion when people have their religion described as being dangerous and unworthy of respect. When a core belief is attacked, it is unreasonable to expect such civility as we would like.

Saying something like, "your deeply held faith is unworthy of respect" is not a way to conduct a rational discussion, IMHO. Calling religion dangerous is not either. I find it supercilious and specious at best.

I respect atheists, but find it unreasonable based on all of the coincidences and pure luck that their explanations rely on. I'm OK with not having empirical evidence of every thing I see and feel. Why my religion isn't respectable is something that I don't quite get. Of course, I'm in the majority here and I'm guessing some of the condescension is in part a defense mechanism. I mean some describe it as being "Rationalist" which by implication means religious people are irrational...

So, unworthy of respect, dangerous, and irrational are not things that foster coolheaded discussion of high minded ideals. $.02

I agree with you in this. I do not know how to put it (+ extra thinking when translating my thoughts from Finnish to English).
Religions, by itself are not ones to consider. To me they are a way to deal with the world, just like philosophy, logical or not, but one way to see the world is not better than the other.
Once when people start to behave how they thing their religions say there lies a risk. Wouldn't mind telling examples. Most people, like you and me, behave rationally, and that's ok. There have been and are some that get the tools for doing things we see immoral as well, and they get their justifications from the religion, be it christianity, islam or whatever. I see that system that gives its followers a free hands to do as he wishes is not something to trust in my own life. Of course atheists are capable of doing stupidies too.
I've long time ago stopped to wonder why it is so difficult for people to be responsible for his/her own actions, and hide behind or get justification from something he believes, but knows it is impossible to get a proof.
And of course i think this has nothing to do with the existence of God. I'm talking about the religious system here.