Islamaphobia?

[Onnedheil]

So, as feminists, women, fighting against patriarchy, against rape culture against male violence to women. My question is this.

Are we suddenly now supposed to be supporting a religion that is an actual rape culture, Openly accepted paedophilia, actual supremacy of toxic masculinity an actual patriarchy Which is responsible for female genital mutilation , based on a the word of a paedophile warmonger who propagates a monotheist singular God who is male .

And when Anyone, speaks out about these things We're labelled as a racist and as islamaphobe and told to silence our voice for the religion of peace?

Have I ended up in the twilight zone or something?

Bertrand: but if there is no such thing as 'science' that could be abstracted from the human beings that do it, then scientific enquirer always does have a value, doesn't it?

Hermione: sorry you don't want to engage, and I'm sorry too if I have written in a way that has made you want to disengage. I do think having different starting points is one of the things that makes debate possible, though.

I do find it very interesting how difficult it is for people to accept a simple definition of atheism. I wonder if it ties in with the people who say that you can't have a moral code without a belief system.

Scientific enquiry - autocorrect at work again!

My experience of scientists is that they generally have no interest in the history of their own discipline. Last year's editions of the journals in their field constitutes as much of the past as they are generally interested in. That's not a sin - but it's not quite having a great regard for the past.

"Bertrand: but if there is no such thing as 'science' that could be abstracted from the human beings that do it, then scientific enquirer always does have a value, doesn't it?"

The scientific method can certainly be abstracted from the human beings that do it- that's rather the point.

Bertrand my atheist mother was obsessed with us all proving ourselves 'better' than religious people because of the insistence of some that atheists couldn't be moral. She went to Catholic school in Ireland!

I also think you're being very rude and prejudiced, NP.

I don't even see the point. It is a bit weird.

vestalvirgin Mormons are christian. I know. I am one. Pray tell what horrible things do the men do to me? Genuinely curious now....

"So I am still interested in what atheism is, if it isn't a belief system."

Presumably you reject the definition of "a lack of belief in a god or gods"?

That seems to be the mood of the thread- I really don't understand why.

And no, an atheist does not automatically believe in The Big Bang and so on. I would imagine most do. But it is not a requirement.

Buffy, do you think then, if I've understood you correctly, that at some point in the future humans may drop science and scientific methods altogether as a means of understanding the universe? No one will use any kind of scientific enquiry or experiments or anything at all like that, and whatever replaces it will be better at explaining the universe without being scientific at all?

If I'm asked what religion I am, in person or on a form, I tick the "none" box. I am not a believer in any religion, organised or personal, or any kind of spiritual belief system that doesn't involve a god. From that piece of information, you can't make any further conclusions about what else I may believe to be true.

I would have said atheism is the absence of religion, or do you have to believe in it to be considered one? If so then that makes it comparable to religion.

But that is just your prejudice Buffy. You are making massive assumptions about what people mean when they say they are an atheist.

I mean, a lot of the reason science is being debated on the thread is because you conflated the two.

I'm not saying it is like trans to position you. I'm trying to communicate the similarity in how it feels when people make assumptions.

I think the weakness in your post structuralist approach is that you are always viewing things as aposition, and not as an attempt to be understood or to advance shared understanding.

I hope I haven't been rude, and I apologise if I have been personally rude to anyone.

I don't think disagreeing with people is the same as being prejudiced. If there is prejudice on display it might be on both sides - in a polarised debate like this you very often get people not listening to the other side. I have tried to listen but perhaps I haven't as much as I think.

But I feel sad if not agreeing about the subject under discussion is in itself interpreted as rudeness and prejudice, because that's a way of shutting down debate.

I did address the question of the evidence for belief in God in an earlier post, Slug. It was at 17.05. But I am sure you won't think it's at all convincing

Buffy some of the things you said does clarify certain areas of the arguments put forward. Thanks.

Slugs, I definitely think that religion can be broken down into a certain range of human needs that it fulfills. And you can compare other, non religious ways of living as often fulfilling those same needs.

It was something I thought about a lot when I decided to bring my kids up with little contact with religion. I had to work out what to replace it with.

As an agnostic, I think atheism is not unlike religion, as it is based on something that nobody can prove

Slugs I absolutely agree with your point below. This is why I was confused in the beginning because Buddhism was being agued as another form of atheism. Science does not explain reincarnation. This is one of their strong belief. So what kind of atheism is this.

When am going through my atheist periods, it's the absence of non creator with understanding that science will explain everything. Which it will with no doubt about that.

Then I do have my religious dip in and out period which tends to come when In dire need of something that I have to influence over.

This makes me consider my self agnostic. It's more about leaving the door open just in case.
My explanation for who I am is that being educated in a religious Catholic school for all my school age is more like brain washing.

I'm not saying it is a floating thing, but neither is it a belief system.
I suppose you could compare it to a wheel. A wheel can be part of many other systems, but it is not alone a system.

I don't think you're causing harm to atheists in particular.

I think you're just not going to understand what other people are trying to convey if you keep assuming things about them based on one small piece of information.

That someone is an atheist.

If someone tells me they are an atheist, I assume it means they don't believe in God.

I don't assume that a. they believe in evolution or b. that if they do believe in evolution, it is connected to being an atheist.

People are atheists for lots of very different reasons based on very different experiences. But you only know that by asking. If you immediately start asking about science, or even proof/evidence, then that's the debate you'll get.