Come talk to me about Hitchens?

[ICBINEG]

How did I not know about Hitchens?

How do I not stay up all night trawling youtube....

Seriously..I have been a kinda quiet atheist...don't poke me with your religion and I won't poke you with how stupid it all sounds to me.

I feel like someone stuck a fire cracker up my back side.

What if there is a moral imperative that atheists get out there and attempt to rid the world of the evil that is religion?

I am all confused now.

ICBINEG I don't think my religious group has used violence, oppression and torture for the end of expansion, not to say that it is perfect or everyone has always behaved perfectly. Do you think the fact that it has survived is proof that it must have used violence to expand?

I'm not trying to be trivial but are you saying the litmus test of whether a religious group is evil is it's attitude towards violence?

I'm an atheist and absolutely no fan of Hitchens. He was pretty crap on women and abortion. But as long as he got to pontificate about god and all the big stuff, leaving women to get on with doing their natural duty by giving birth and laughing at his jokes, then he was fine.

Pedro you say "most religious texts say, either explicitly or can easily be interpreted as saying, kill the unbelievers" and I'm not too sure about this.

How have you decided what to include in all religious texts and which ones count. I know that sounds pernickety and you are making a serious point but I wonder if it would be possible for a religious text to pass your test of not saying kill the unbelievers? I hope what I am asking makes sense.

Come the fuck off it.

Anti religious, not atheist. You wouldn't go killing religionists because you are atheist, you might if you are a militant anti religionist. Is that really so hard for you to understand??

You can't do anything in the name of atheism because it has no mandate to do things in the name of.

Seig So that twice I feel you have attacked me for saying the opposite of what I actually said.

Firstly I have gone out of my way more than once to state that individuals may be blameless or guilty within both religion or atheism yet you yell that I can't understand that not all the religious are militant.

Secondly I state that I definitively would NOT lay the blame for the british empire activities on religion on the basis that it was religious people in control at the time and you yell that I do blame them on religion?

Are you really as dense as you are acting? Or are you simply massively deficient in reading skills?

isabella I think it is a fair litmus test as to whether a religion is a force of evil in the world...yes.

Although I admit there may be other criteria of lesser importance...

Which maor religions do you feel may be guilt free on that score?

From that Nailak, I take it you're in favour of the disgusting pracrise of FGM.

Why don't men cover their faces, an article by a Yemeni woman bemused at having to cover up and still getting leered at. Imagine her amazement at seeing women in a Western country not getting stared at for dressing 'immodestly'.

It's time to change these mens' attitude, wouldn't you?

Ohh did I have genital mutilation in my list of things a neonate exploring their intrinsic relationship with god/spirituality would never in a million years think of?

Consider it added!

It sounds as if you are not necessarily against religion and religious groups, which I thought was what you were originally saying but I may have misunderstood that. I say that because it sounds as if pacifist religious groups are not evil in your eyes.

Again I may have missed it but I didn't completely pick up that your real concern is 'major religions'. Are you assigning different groups to the same 'major religion' even if they don't see things the same way? It doesn't seem reasonable to say someone's religious group is evil based on the beliefs or actions of a different religious group.

I am a bit nervous about asking these questions but I think it is an important subject.

I am in favour of clitoral hoodectomy by a surgeon by those women who want it. Not of FGM

Definitely it is time to change these mens attitudes. These men exist in all cultures and religions.

Religion, you all say, is bad for the planet - can someone explain to me why it is worse than militant atheism? Let's not argue Hitler all over again. Let's stick to Stalin and Mao. Let's just start with a glance at their combined death tolls - somewhere near 100 million or more. Now tell me again why the RC church is to blame for desertification in China and pollution in Russia

Yes - let's avoid talking about Hitler. Embarrassing to admit that he was born a Catholic, remained a Catholic all his life, was never excommunicated and publicly proclaimed that Jesus was his saviour. Ooops

But you know what - I would never advance that argument anyway. Because it's stupid. Nothing Hitler did, in terms of atrocities, was because of his religion - or lack of it. He was influenced by an ideology.

And that's the same as Stalin and Mao. Yes, they did terrible things - but it was not in "the name of atheism". The fact that they were atheists had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

I am an atheist. If I went shoplifting tomorrow, who in their right mind would say I was doing it "in the name of atheism"? Nobody does anything because of something they DON'T believe in - that makes no logical sense. They take actions based on what they DO believe in - and in this case it was an ideology. An ideology, by the way, that had far more in common with organised religion than the free-thinking atheism we have today.

They demanded worship, of themselves and the state, and only got rid of religion because that diluted the worship they felt they were due. At no point did they say, "Right...I don't believe in a god, so I'm going to kill people because, er, I don't believe in a god".

Really, this trotting out of Stalin and Mao by Christians displays not only ignorance of the history but also of what atheism actually means.

Ellie much of what you said sounds very reasonable but I think it is possible that for some people not believing in God or another religious/spiritual idea does liberate them to do anything they think they can get away with including violence.

I think that atheists in general are more likely to suffer doubt about their actions?

Like I have to question all my actions and measure them against my own internal moral compass because I have no ready made set of rules to follow.

I think that the religious are more likely to see things in black and white because some believe whole heartedly in the rule set they have been given.

Or in other words you are more likely to think you can not only get away with violence but that violence is actually the best course of action when you think you have god backing you...

I'm not sure black and white thinking or lack of doubt or questioning actions internally are especially linked to being either religious or atheist.

I do question my actions and tend not o see things in black and white but I'm not sure whether I necessarily pass your test of being religious so perhaps my experience doesn't count in the larger picture.

Are you convinced that any religious or spiritually based approach is inherently 'evil'?

'having god backing you' I think I know what you mean when you say this but it doesn't really make much sense to me as a concept at first reading.

Ellie much of what you said sounds very reasonable but I think it is possible that for some people not believing in God or another religious/spiritual idea does liberate them to do anything they think they can get away with including violence

Not supported by any evidence. There is a very clear correlation between levels of religiosity in a country and crime.

The most atheistic (or non-religious would be a fairer way to put it) on Earth are those with the lowest crime levels - Sweden, Japan etc. Those with the highest number of religious people, like America, have the highest.

I'm NOT saying this is all down to religion, or the lack of it, but if you were right there would be some evidence suggesting that religious societies are more likely to be law abiding than non-religious ones and that is simply not the case.

And are you really suggesting that for many religious people it's their religion that stops them being violent or committing crime? Not just that they are decent people who care about others? Really?

The most atheistic (or non-religious would be a fairer way to put it) countries on Earth ... that should be. Sorry.

Ellie much of what you said sounds very reasonable but I think it is possible that for some people not believing in God or another religious/spiritual idea does liberate them to do anything they think they can get away with including violence.

How exactly does one become liberated to do anything they want because they don't believe in a religion? What a ridiculous comment. This would only hold any weight if you genuinely believed that all morals can only come from religion. To be frank, I think if you need a book to tell you what's right and wrong then you probably have a much weaker sense of self morality than most atheists and are more likely to commit horrendous acts inadvertently because you thought it's what your God wanted.

And for the record, just like Penn Jillette, I do exactly as much murdering, raping and pillaging as I like. Which is none, because I'm not a psychopath.

Are you convinced that any religious or spiritually based approach is inherently 'evil'?

9/11

And for the record, just like Penn Jillette, I do exactly as much murdering, raping and pillaging as I like. Which is none, because I'm not a psychopath

What none, Pedro? You are letting the atheistic side down, you know. I thought we were all meant to be immoral sinners. I must be doing it wrong

That's really interesting Ellie (about Sweden and Japan) I wasn't trying to make a point about countries though, just about the possibility that some people might be disinhibited by their convictions. I don't mean to suggest that they shouldn't think what they think. Does my point not make any sense to you at all?

I don't see why I am implying religious societies should be better behaved. I'm thinking on a rather individual level I'm afraid but I'm not convinced being religious as such is being party to something evil.

For myself I think religious conviction has played a part in preventing me being violent. I do know a lot of people (religious and otherwise) who seem naturally nice and nonviolent but for me it is a bit if a struggle.

For myself I think religious conviction has played a part in preventing me being violent. I do know a lot of people (religious and otherwise) who seem naturally nice and nonviolent but for me it is a bit if a struggle.

So without religion you'd be a violent criminal?

What none, Pedro? You are letting the atheistic side down, you know. I thought we were all meant to be immoral sinners. I must be doing it wrong

Well, you know, I did consider it once, but then I got hungry and went to McDonald's.

Don't let me stop you though. Far be it from me to go around dictating moral truths. That's the reserve of the beardy dude up the mountain with his chisel.

Pedro apologies for my badly posed question. I didn't mean is there one example of religious evil (there are so many awful ones) but whether religious/spiritual approaches to life appear inevitably and always evil in every case? ie is it possible to be religious and not evil?

How exactly does one become liberated to do anything they want because they don't believe in a religion? What a ridiculous comment. This would only hold any weight if you genuinely believed that all morals can only come from religion. To be frank, I think if you need a book to tell you what's right and wrong then you probably have a much weaker sense of self morality than most atheists and are more likely to commit horrendous acts inadvertently because you thought it's what your God wanted.

I can't agree with your logic here and I'm afraid you have misunderstood me. If all the 'you's are meant to apply personally to me you are assuming I hold beliefs I don't hold but if not then we don't necessarily disagree entirely. I don't have a God telling me to do hideous things as far as I can tell. I don't think you object to my being guided by the writings and thoughts of others I wouldn't say I 'need a book to tell me what's right and wrong'. You may well have a point that I am weaker than most atheists.

I am not trying to make enormous generalisations and I apologise if I seemed to imply that I believe religion is necessary to morality because that is not what I think at all. I have met individuals who believed that the only consequences of their appalling actions were whether or not they got caught. They did not have the self morality of most atheists. Ellie was saying no one does anything because of what they don't believe in and I was wondering if that is literally true.

I think involvement with the underground railroad and kindertransport was spiritually motivated for some people.