Athiests, where do you get your moral values?

[burning 4 revenge]

Agree on all points.

He has an obsessional loathing of religion that must have some deeply psychological and personal roots

[Moai]

What is the alternative to entering a church and committing sacrelege?

 

It is only sacrilege if you are a believer. Just by going to your church you are committing blasphemy regarding the countless thousands of other religions that exist.

[clv0116]

Any advocacy of a political position is illegal from the pulpit.

 

From the pulpit only might make sense. But I'd like to see the law you're referring to.

[Moai]

I agree it was an exellent post, but your love of atheism goes beyond rational to religious zealotry

 

Atheism is not supposed to be a religion Moai

 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

 

Others have their style, I have mine. You can't please everyone.

[Moai]

From the pulpit only might make sense. But I'd like to see the law you're referring to.

 

501©3 Tax Exempt status:

 

"Organizations described in section 501©(3) are prohibited from conducting political campaign activities to intervene in elections to public office. The Internal Revenue Service website elaborates upon this prohibition as follows:

"Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501©(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

"Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

"On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or © have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

"The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition."

[clv0116]

501©3 Tax Exempt status:

 

Ah, that's been defied on a regular basis and no one except a few huge 'ministries' have ever been acted against with this IRS rule. Indeed there have been a few organized challenges to it in the last 5 years that the IRS has refused to take up as far as I know.

[Moai]

He has an obsessional loathing of religion that must have some deeply psychological and personal roots

 

Demonstrably not so, doctor.

 

If you notice, I don't respond to "what is hell like" or "what does god want me to do" threads. In fact, the vast majority of threads in this section have no responses from me.

 

What I do respond to are incorrect assertions regarding atheists and atheism, and why religion is a negative influence on mankind--which it demonstrably is. This thread is specifically about where atheist get their morals. Being an atheist, I can certainly speak to that, no?

 

In this country we cannot teach biology in an substantive way because of ignorant religious zealots who insist that the Earth is 6,000 years old. Currently, the only country in NATO that scores lower than the US in math and science is Turkey. We are 19th and sliding. The threats to the environment today are catastrophic, yet believers deny global warming even exists, and suggest that Jesus will be back before any serious damage will occur.

 

Lest the "fanatic" argument come out again, there are senators and congressmen who hold this view. And the rest of them vote.

 

Watch the news. How many children are denied medical care in favor of faith healing? How many people are blown up? How many girls forced into marriage at age 8? How many gay children kill themselves because of their parents disown them because of their religion? How many children must be abused at the hands of youth pastors and priests?

 

Check out this study:

 

http://www.ffrf.org/timely/epidstudy.php

 

How many people, the majority of whom can least afford it--give their money to lying charlatans in the name of god?

 

There was an Indian couple who emigrated here and settled in Portland. They became born-again Christians. Their son had a serious brain disorder, one that would certainly take his life. Neurosurgeons gave him two years to live with medication.

 

The couple were fans of Benny Hinn and his healing ministry. They attended a rally, and felt the presence of god, telling them to trust him and he would heal their child. They made the decision to take him off medication, against the advice of their medical doctors. The child died, of course. What is worse, the couple blames themselves because they think if their faith was greater their child would have been cured.

 

There are too many instances similar to this to list. One often hears, "Those people are extremists. Religion makes people happy and so it must be ok." But that statement is empty. It is religious thinking instead of reason that leads to such atrocities. Religion may not always lead everyone to kill people, but it is the most efficient tool for doing so.

 

Perhaps you see me as a zealot because I care so deeply about people and the future of mankind and the planet as whole. We must abandon superstition or we are certainly doomed.

[Moai]

Ah, that's been defied on a regular basis and no one except a few huge 'ministries' have ever been acted against with this IRS rule. Indeed there have been a few organized challenges to it in the last 5 years that the IRS has refused to take up as far as I know.

I know because they fear a backlash from the religious. Doesn't make it right, of course.

[burning 4 revenge]

Demonstrably not so, doctor.

 

If you notice, I don't respond to "what is hell like" or "what does god want me to do" threads. In fact, the vast majority of threads in this section have no responses from me.

 

What I do respond to are incorrect assertions regarding atheists and atheism, and why religion is a negative influence on mankind--which it demonstrably is. This thread is specifically about where atheist get their morals. Being an atheist, I can certainly speak to that, no?

 

In this country we cannot teach biology in an substantive way because of ignorant religious zealots who insist that the Earth is 6,000 years old. Currently, the only country in NATO that scores lower than the US in math and science is Turkey. We are 19th and sliding. The threats to the environment today are catastrophic, yet believers deny global warming even exists, and suggest that Jesus will be back before any serious damage will occur.

 

Lest the "fanatic" argument come out again, there are senators and congressmen who hold this view. And the rest of them vote.

 

Watch the news. How many children are denied medical care in favor of faith healing? How many people are blown up? How many girls forced into marriage at age 8? How many gay children kill themselves because of their parents disown them because of their religion? How many children must be abused at the hands of youth pastors and priests?

 

Check out this study:

 

http://www.ffrf.org/timely/epidstudy.php

 

How many people, the majority of whom can least afford it--give their money to lying charlatans in the name of god?

 

There was an Indian couple who emigrated here and settled in Portland. They became born-again Christians. Their son had a serious brain disorder, one that would certainly take his life. Neurosurgeons gave him two years to live with medication.

 

The couple were fans of Benny Hinn and his healing ministry. They attended a rally, and felt the presence of god, telling them to trust him and he would heal their child. They made the decision to take him off medication, against the advice of their medical doctors. The child died, of course. What is worse, the couple blames themselves because they think if their faith was greater their child would have been cured.

 

There are too many instances similar to this to list. One often hears, "Those people are extremists. Religion makes people happy and so it must be ok." But that statement is empty. It is religious thinking instead of reason that leads to such atrocities. Religion may not always lead everyone to kill people, but it is the most efficient tool for doing so.

 

Perhaps you see me as a zealot because I care so deeply about people and the future of mankind and the planet as whole. We must abandon superstition or we are certainly doomed.

Though I share the same basic beliefs towards metaphysics you do, I have too many nostalgic and romantic attatchments to the Vatican to hate religion like you do

 

I think we both have to admit a bit of subjectivity here

[sally4sara]

Though I share the same basic beliefs towards metaphysics you do, I have too many nostalgic and romantic attatchments to the Vatican to hate religion like you do

 

I think we both have to admit a bit of subjectivity here

 

In this way, do you feel that your personal experience and relationship with your birth religion is one entirely separate from the Vatican, Pope and his persistence to mislead followers in S. Africa, and priests who have abused their powerful positions?

 

I can understand this. Tayloring the religion to only draw upon that which feeds you spiritually.

[Moai]

Though I share the same basic beliefs towards metaphysics you do, I have too many nostalgic and romantic attatchments to the Vatican to hate religion like you do

 

I think we both have to admit a bit of subjectivity here

 

Not being Catholic, the feelings I hold for that faith are the same as for any other, be it Bahai, Lutheran, Muslim, Jainism or Scientology. My father was a Baptist minister, but I don't have any nostalgia for that faith, good or bad.

 

Hate is quite the strong word, but regardless of the description of my feelings, they extend beyond religion into any form of the irrational. IMO, religion is just organized irrationality.

 

At the risk of committing a Godwin, let's say that I had great experiences going out on Hitler Youth camping trips, so therefore I have nostalgia for the NSDAP. That doesn't forgive the crimes of the Nazis or make their ideology any less abhorrent, does it? And is my nostalgia for the organization, or for the people whom I met and had fun with--a reaction that would have been the same whether it happened at the CYO, scouting, or the swim team.

 

All that said, I do take your point.

[clv0116]

I know because they fear a backlash from the religious. Doesn't make it right, of course.

 

In any case, it's not that there is some mythical law against church exerting political influence at all, it's merely a matter of any tax-exempt organization endangering it's tax exempt status.

 

Also for what it's worth I don't think the proponents of global warming have demonstrated anything that would show the trend is human caused, indeed the evidence seems to be more that we're in a cycle of warming that is a natural consequence of exiting the last cold period. Subject for a different thread though.

[dobler33]

i realy admire all of your patient attempts to respond to FnB's bizarrely surreal and disjointed commentary, folks, but i seriously can't figure out what he/she is talking about. who stormed and desecrated a church? how did we get to atheist committing crimes and not being held accountable? who is cuddling lions and hanging out in mosques? where did we get to martyrs? am i missing something, or is FnB like dangerously fragmented and tangential in his/her reasoning? can someone explain this to me? and if FnB is a wingnut, why are we bothering to debate him/her?

[TaraMaiden]

It's a 'he'.

And you'll find that people who are so devotedly single-minded about doctrine are apt to jump in fits and starts, without actually definitively addressing salient points in any coherent manner...they lose the thread of what they;re saying, literally.

or lose their grip, one or the other. It's easily done when you are beset by blinding logic from all sides, and all you have is one book to go by.

I still haven't had my question addressed, chielfy because it's possible he was actually referring to somebody - or something else entirely.

He might even have been in the wrong thread.

or wrong forum.

Or wrong website.

 

 

[Moai]

i realy admire all of your patient attempts to respond to FnB's bizarrely surreal and disjointed commentary, folks, but i seriously can't figure out what he/she is talking about. who stormed and desecrated a church? how did we get to atheist committing crimes and not being held accountable? who is cuddling lions and hanging out in mosques? where did we get to martyrs? am i missing something, or is FnB like dangerously fragmented and tangential in his/her reasoning? can someone explain this to me? and if FnB is a wingnut, why are we bothering to debate him/her?

 

Some time ago, a group of young LGBT advocates went into a church whose pastor habitually gave sermons condemning their lifestyle and held up signs and chanted some slogans. Parishioners forcibly removed them. That is the only evidence I have ever heard of.

 

As far as the atheist crimes go, I assume he means reproductive rights.

 

No idea about the martyrs thing.

 

It is my opinion that even wingnuts should be challenged, as there are those who are not up to speed on many of the issues under discussion, and lack of response can be interpreted as there being no counter-argument, or fear on the part of those who disagree.

 

This can be seen in the claims of Creationists that biologists fear debating them, when in fact biologists don't debate because they do not want to give the Creationist position any credibility as there really is nothing to debate. It was an error is strategy, and Creationism has grown as a result.

[dunstable]

It's a 'he'.

...they lose the thread of what they;re saying, literally.

or lose their grip, one or the other. It's easily done when you are beset by blinding logic from all sides, and all you have is one book to go by.

And one specific interpretation of that one book!

 

I was amused when he said he could easily prove his points with "conditional probabilities" but chose not to because we wouldn't understand the math. I invited him to provide the data and let us see whether we understand it but of course nothing was forthcoming.

[dobler33]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_Williams

http://www.pbs.org/thisfarbyfaith/people/cecil_williams.html

 

btw, FnB, this is some information about the pastor of that "homosexual agenda" church i help out at. in november there will be a massive celebration at the opera house when people like maya angelou, oprah winfrey and coretta scott king are scheduled to come and honor him. if you have a problem with his faith or his interpretation of the golden rule and the love-thy-neighbor elements of the bible, i suggest you take it up with him. as i said, i'm just there to help with the dirty work.

[dunstable]

He has an obsessional loathing of religion ...

Strong words and offered without any reasons why you would think that.

[FleshNBones]

Let's say that on the spur of the moment he saw two options. (1) Let them push him around and take the cracker off him. (2) Walk off with the cracker to assert that he was not a person to be pushed about and humilated. Neither a good option. Option (1) humiliates him. Option (2) offends the Church goers. Which is the ethical choice for him?

Common sense would dictate that you do not participate in a ritual if you aren't ready to follow the rules. Taking the wafer from him is not a matter of pride, but one of respect. The kid had no business being there or doing that.

 

My impression so far is that this kid is a trouble maker, and you want to reward his behavior.

[sally4sara]

Common sense would dictate that you do not participate in a ritual if you aren't ready to follow the rules. Taking the wafer from him is not a matter of pride, but one of respect. The kid had no business being there or doing that.

 

My impression so far is that this kid is a trouble maker, and you want to reward his behavior.

 

Not beating someone up for doing something you don't like isn't equal to rewarding the behavior in question.

 

But then....I supposedly have no morals.

[FleshNBones]

It is only sacrilege if you are a believer. Just by going to your church you are committing blasphemy regarding the countless thousands of other religions that exist.

Clearly, you don't respect boundaries.

 

You are completely intollerant.

[Moai]

Common sense would dictate that you do not participate in a ritual if you aren't ready to follow the rules. Taking the wafer from him is not a matter of pride, but one of respect. The kid had no business being there or doing that.

 

My impression so far is that this kid is a trouble maker, and you want to reward his behavior.

 

No, I just don't want to see him harmed physically, especially since he did no physical harm to someone else. Granted, the wafer had a spell put on it that made it the literal body of Christ, but common sense says that is impossible and nonsense.

 

Someone on another site had a great idea: Put the wafer in question in a basket with identical wafers that have not gone through the ceremony. If an offended person can pick out the blessed, Body of Christ wafer then certainly apologies are in order. If not, then all those who issued death threats and want to "kick his ass" must admit that the cracker is just a cracker. Shocker: There were no takers.

 

If transubstantiation is true, does it work on any cracker, or just a certain kind? Would it work if you put cheese on the cracker first?

 

Jesus was a man but also god, right? So you are not only committing cannibalism, but you are also consuming the flesh of your deity. Beyond that, consuming same not only saves you from eternal damnation, but it gives you moral insights and determination denied those who do not engage in it.

 

What a magical little cracker!

[Moai]

Clearly, you don't respect boundaries.

 

You are completely intollerant.

 

Not so. I don't go into churches and disrupt services. I don't think that it is right for anyone to do that.

 

I just don't think that people should threaten to kill others for stealing crackers, no matter the superstition involved.

 

Once you leave church, however, your beliefs are fair game for debate, especially if you put them in the public sphere, which every religion does everywhere.

 

Every person has the right to believe as he or she sees fit, but that does not mean that he or she is free from the criticism of said beliefs.

[dunstable]

Common sense would dictate that you do not participate in a ritual if you aren't ready to follow the rules. Taking the wafer from him is not a matter of pride, but one of respect. The kid had no business being there or doing that.

 

My impression so far is that this kid is a trouble maker, and you want to reward his behavior.

We were discussing ethical dilemmas, remember? You've gone off on a tangent again.

[dobler33]

Clearly, you don't respect boundaries.

 

You are completely intollerant.

 

 

how so? this is merely a logical statement. say you've been told that zues is the only true god and so you are a zeusite. and the guy sitting next to you has been told that ganesh is the only true god and so is a gane****e. one of you is wrong, right? to the gane****e you are committing blasphemy by talking about zeus, and to you the gane****e is committing blasphemy by talking about ganesh. similarly, if i believe that a carrot is the transubstantiated body of my carrot god and you eat a carrot, have you eaten my god? or have you eaten a carrot because you don't believe in my carrot god? there is absolutely no valuative bias or intolerance involved here. you are rather touchy, especially when it comes to inarguable logic.