Rational Ag

I don't live in a society in which the laws are being driven and controlled by people who insist that Santa exists. The people in my country do not make laws and rules based upon what Santa wants.

Fellowship and discussion with like-minded atheists over church-state seperation issues is only one of many reasons these message boards are important, and quite different than a "support group" for non-santa believers.

-Rational Ag

Starboy

GeoTheo, this is a christian "truth" free zone. A place where chrisitian "truth" mongers are exposed for what they really are: people with no morals and no itellectual integrity. This place is an oasis for those of us that have had it up to HERE with christian "truth"! The sad thing about all of this is if christians practiced "live and let live", this place would not be necessary!

GeoTheo, in case you don't get it, a full life time of putting up with christians waging war with "truth" has made me militant. To a christian there are only two kinds of people, those who have been saved and those that have not. GeoTheo are you so dense as to not see what is wrong with this? Is it not obvious to you that this attitude is arrogant, thoughtless and hostile? You are welcome to believe in what you choose, but respect my right to have nothing to do with it if I so choose and respect my right to associate with like minded people such as are on the forum. Beleive me GeoTheo, I would be more than content if you and the rest of the christians on the planet would just keep your GOOD NEWS to yourselves.

Please take this in the manner it was intended. If you don't like it you can grow up, or go away!

Starboy

beoba

I'm more comfortable with myself now than as I ever was as a Christian. I come here because these forums kick ass. I've begun to meet some of the people here, and everyone so far has been awesome, even if I didn't agree with them. I'm still more or less in the closet about my beliefs in real life, so being able to pseudo-anonymously be a member of a group of people with ideas similar to mine is very enjoyable. I don't need a group of people to tell me what I should think, and from what I've seen, most people here (with exception of people selling religion) don't feel a need to prosetylize (sp?) to others anyway.

I'm already comfortable with my beliefs, whether you like it or not. However, I'm always exploring for new ideas, there's always something new to learn.

[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: alphatronics ]</p>

DMB

Note to Mods: Looking back at this thread, I'm not sure why I posted it in MRD. Is this the right place for it?

sullster

I do not come here for "reassurance". I am utterly sure that all religions are irrational systems which I will never believe. I do not need anyone else to make me feel better about my views on religion.

I do come here to add my thoughts, but most of all I come here to read the postings of people more articulate and knowledgeable than I. I agree with Alphatronics, when he says he enjoys the "ass kicking" going on.

It is very pleasureable that there is a place where the nasty fundy theist can come and get his butt booted. Yet, I do admire that most of the butt-kicking is done in an intelligent and articulate manner with a fair amount of respect shown to the kickee. This make being here even better. Intelligent and polite ass kicking! Yeah!

Ojuice5001

I have often felt a need for reassurance that Christianity and Islam aren't true. (The whole hell thing.) So I lurked here for such reassurance, but noticed that metaphysical naturalism is no more friendly to Religio Romana theism than it is to Christian theism. So I registered, started some vague deistic threads (my original "basic beliefs" said "A hierarchical view of the universe, like a less otherworldly verision of Plato"), then showed my true colors as a polytheist, and now this board is great for all kinds of things, including discussion of all the religions of the world with less bias than would be shown by Christians, discussions on nonrelgious topics, great debates between Christians and atheists, a chance to conceivably convert some atheists to the Religio, and still reassurance against Christianity.

So to sum up, I have used this board for reassurance against Christianity, though it introduces the equal danger that I would convert to naturalistic atheism. But I have vowed never to return to either Christianity or naturalistic atheism; they are both powers that must be resisted by all who serve Jupiter. If I were not a Religio Romana, I think the most likely new faith would be a worship of rodents and the gods who care about them.

sighhswolf

This is actually a very good thread, and relevent
question.
It may seem to religionists who stop in here that
non-believers are (in the vernacular of the old west 1800's), "circling the wagons" against the god threat.
Or building a fortress against the rising tide of
religious barbarism.
(actually that is quite close to the truth)
Reassurance?
Of what?

I think that for a great deal of those who find this place and become members or regulars it is
a learning experience.
So many of the ex-christians and ex-theists who end up here, are perplexed and at times lost conceptually.
There are actually very few people especially in the USA, that have been raised in an atheistic/Agnostic family enviornment.
It is a cultural shock for many who realize they have been taken for a ride by organized religion.
Those people who have decided due to a mental awakening and the act of personal discovery and budding rationality and reasoning, that they no longer want to be part of a contrived lie perpetrated on humankind by manipulators for god.

At that time it can be bewildering to let go of the comfortable conformity in religion, for the harshness of reality.
Many dont have any idea what they actually believe.....and even if they have decided not to stay chained to the slavery of god worship, they really have no idea what direction to go.
They ask themselves "If I see the irrationality of religion and I have decided to break from it, what exactly DO I BELIEVE?"
What do others who have gone through this believe or how do they label themselves.
If I am not a "-------------" insert religious label here, then what am I?"

This place gives them the opportunity to explore all the possibilities of free thinking and answer their questions.
It provides support for those who know they do not want to give any more of their precious time in this life over to a lie, but they lack direction and have not as yet been exposed to the help of kindred non-believers.

In my case this forum has allowed me to speak freely, to espouse ideas, to express my thoughts in an atmosphere of rationality and reasoning.

It gives me a place to learn about things they dont teach you in sunday school...........and express my disdain for those who use religion to aquire wealth and political power while destroying lives and the planet we inhabit in the name of some god.

Wolf

GeoTheo

I guess most people come here for some of the same reasons I do. I find people here particularly intelligent and articulate. Except most people probably don't come here to debate. I hang out mostly in the Creation/evolution forum. There are a lot of real scientists there.
I still think people here have a bit of a warped view of reality that is mutually reinforced by hanging out here. Posters seem to pick up culture here. After a while they start to talk alike and use the same arguements.
I think there is a big influence of former fundy reactionaries that present kind of a view of reality that is slightly skewed due to their past experience. Some even seem to have retained their fundamentalist way of thinking and now have switched from thinking secular humanism is taking over the world to the conviction that Christian fundies are taking it over. They sem to frame debates with Christian fundies that are mutually supportive of each other. For example Christian fundies disbelieve in evolution because they believe that,if true, it would prove God false.
Some fundamentalist atheists totally agree and therefore become serious students of it for the purpose of debate.
Looks to me like two sides of the same coin.
Not that everyone has such a narrow view of the world here.

GeoTheo

I also see a lot of demographic similarities here that have allowed me to build a profile of what an atheist is.
In a sense I think it is a reaction to a reaction.
fundamentalism being a reaction to rapidly changing culture and atheism being a reaction to fundamentalism going to far.

David Bowden

Hi GeoTheo. (I don't know that we've met here; I don't often visit the science forums.) Just a couple of observations:

I could say the exact same thing regarding the local Campus Crusade for Christ group... but isn't it just true of churches and social groups (particularly the "activist" or "crusading" ones) generally?

Undoubtedly. The simplified way of looking at things that is a trait of fundamentalism is very appealing to some people. However, not all atheists can be characterized this way, not even all the former fundamentalist Christians among us. I regard many of the prominent II posters with respect, precisely because they do not demonstrate a fundamentalistic mindset, and they choose to engage theists as human beings with different intellectual convictions, not as mindless puppets.

Well, there is that Great Commission thing to be reckoned with...

Actually, I think there's some merit to the conservative religious believers' fear that secular humanism is taking over the world. Where their fear is unfounded is in the notion that humanists actively plan the forced deconversion and outlawing of all belief systems that aren't in line with secular humanism.

In debate we try to meet the other person on his/her own terms. If a fundamentalist insists that creationism is true and therefore the Christian gospel is true (or at least, atheism is false), then we need to deal with his premises in order to show why his conclusion is untenable. The same could be said for those who insist that it's historically certain that Jesus was physically resurrected, or that the existence of Christian martyrs proves their beliefs were grounded in the truth.

Because so many pro-Christian argumentative tactics have become standardized (also Pascal's wager, the Shroud of Turin, Irreducible Complexity, etc), so have the counter-tactics we use in debunking Christian claims that those arguments are "solid." Some of us are old hands at arguing against the more common apologetic tactics. "We don't find them persuasive; here's why." Some of us are relative newcomers; they do learn from the more experienced atheists...

...and why shouldn't they? That's part of the educational mission of II, I believe. Just as universities sometimes set up debates so that students can learn the ins and outs of each side of an issue, lurkers here may find it profitable to follow the presentation and critique of apologetics, and new atheists seeking to expand the range of their discussions with believers in real life may find it profitable to practice here.

New Christian evidence or arguments would require new analysis and creative answers / rebuttals (if analysis finds them unconvincing); frankly, I think most atheist debaters here would love and welcome genuinely new and exciting pro-Christian arguments to chew on (as we did when Dembski/Behe came to our attention). Until then, we deal with pro-Christian arguments using the familiar terms.

(We'd eagerly analyze a new case for Islam or for Shintoism as well, but this being a predominantly Christian- cultured group of theists and atheists, we mostly deal with Christian arguments. I expect that'll change over time, and I look forward to meeting more theists and atheists with different religious backgrounds.)

Basically, if an argument isn't convincing, and it can be clearly and efficiently shown to be unconvincing, people (other than atheist newbies) won't reinvent the wheel every time the same argument comes up; it's fair enough just to refer to the established critique of that argument and ask whether the apologist has anything new to bring to the table. If not, there's no need to frame the debate differently. It's over; the apologist just wasn't aware of that fact previously.

I'm curious - why a profile? Why do atheists need to be "typed out"? I recognize many varieties of atheists here... and know of diverse atheist personalities / "demographic types" who've never posted here.

Please do keep in mind that profiling atheists based on this web board is probably going to lead you to generalize from incomplete information...

For instance, such a profile will not incorporate information from non-English speaking and / or non-Internet using atheists, as well as English-speaking atheists who for whatever reason(s) just don't frequent these boards, or at least don't post very often. There'll be precious little to draw from, regarding atheists from secular or religious but non-Christian family / social backgrounds.

At best your profile would be based on atheists whose posts you've encountered; i.e., those atheists who choose to engage threads that you tend to read about.

Perhaps some fundamentalists do switch sides because their religion goes "too far," though how they could come to that conclusion, if they were really convinced of the essential truth of Christianity, is beyond me.

I can't speak for atheists who fit that profile, but I personally left Christianity (and Christian ministry to boot) after a long and painful period of reflection on the history and nature of the religion itself. To sum up: it wasn't that Christianity went "too far," it's that Christianity is a human invention that has evolved and continues to evolve, as are all religions. This is definitely not the truth as Christianity teaches things. I had to decide whether Christianity's story was true or not, not whether some Christians had gone "too far".

Prior to leaving Christianity (I was a pretty conservative Evangelical), I did abhor the fundamentalism I encountered simply because it wasn't playing straight with the facts (i.e., age of the earth, etc.) and it tended to use psychological manipulation that I considered unconscionable and unworthy of a truth-telling organization, even as a young person.

Critical thinking in general, and a reluctance to ally myself with those who endorsed questionable beliefs and tactics in particular, moved me further and further from traditional "orthodox" Christianity, until I couldn't in all honesty call myself a believer in the Christian faith.

I became an atheist only as a last resort, to tell you the truth. For some time, after leaving Christianity, I still wanted to believe that there was some helpful higher power, some escape into the infinite at the end of life, etc. In the end I simply couldn't justify believing in those things, and ultimately I came to the conclusion that it is most honest to give provisional assent to the atheist position.

The facts as I understand them mesh with atheism, with a reality without a God, better than with any religious or spiritual tradition I've encountered. I'm not incapable of changing my mind on that, given convincing evidence/ argument to the contrary. I've changed my mind for the sake of the truth; I'd do it again, given good reason to do so.

Finally, I don't come here for reassurance in my atheism. I do come here sometimes for reassurance that I'm not the only one worried that (for instance) conservative politicians are making it harder for nontheists to participate as equals with theists in public gatherings. Sometimes I need to commisserate with like-minded folks concerning the idiocy I encounter in real life. Stuff like that. Also, I enjoy the philosophy discussions, and find the more sophisticated debates for and against God and the whole Historical Jesus matter to be stimulating. And I'm just quirky enough to dive into the trivial misc discussions arena now and then to deposit my wisdom there.

I don't believe I fit your profile (to the admittedly limited extent I understand it). But I am curious about your need to create a profile at all. And what is your profile to be useful for, especially if it does not fit some (or many) atheists?

- David

[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: David Bowden / wide-eyed wanderer ]</p>