Born Free

Okay I will elaborate

I am a decent law abiding citizen of my country, I pay all my bills on time, pay tax ni as required, I don't do drugs, I don't beat up old ladies nor do I vandalise other's property. I don't steal from anyone, nor do I covet anyone. My heart tells me that it is wrong to cheat, steal, kill, cause disruption to society and I don't and all without following a religion.

Common sense (look the meaning up in a dictionary) dictates that it's in my best interest to follow the law of the land and so I do.

I am what I am and I live a very organised life thank you very much. I do not claim to offer anything to anyone and I do not live in chaos. I am free to do what I want as long as I don't hurt anyone in the process and within the law.

This is how it is for me without going into huge debates about morality etc etc.

I am a good, kind, honest, decent, loving and compassionate woman who loves her fiance and doesn't cheat on him and who adores her son.

I do not force anyone to believe anything, what they do in their life is entirely up to them and not my affair.

Read all of the posts, being an atheist as has already been pointed out is not a belief system. It does not claim to offer anything to anyone.

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Bree

I fail to see what keeping "the ecosystem intact and operating properly" has to do with ANY belief system, let alone atheism. Is it a requirement for a belief system? If so, is this a personal opinion of yours?

I assume you're a theist, from this statement. What most theists don't understand is that, at the beginning of the world, there was NO religion (even if there was a god, as theists state, there wasn't religion). Religion is something created by man for man. Even if there was a god, he didn't have anything to do with it.

Jack the Bodiless

It's worth comparing the environmental stance of most atheists with that of fundamentalist Christians. Many of those have declared that environmentalism is "un-Christian": the End of Days is upon us, the environment doesn't have to last much longer (and won't anyhow, the Earth will soon be desroyed), and God gave Man dominion over the Earth, so it's ours to abuse as we see fit.

Daggah

Hey look, it's a Muslim version of Eternal.

Eudaimonist

Atheism as such has nothing to offer of this sort. At most, atheism is a position on god-belief, not a religion or way of life unto itself. There are philosophies of ethics and politics that do not assume the existence of God that may offer answers.

Short answer: natural processes.

Atheism is not an ethical doctrine, however various atheistic ethics may hold answers to this question. Religion got to the moral issue of murder first, but that doesn't mean that atheistic philosophies which condemn murder are merely plagarising. Originality can be found in the reasons offered as to why murder is wrong. Atheistic philosophies won't answer: because God says murder is wrong.

Secular Humanists, Objectivists, and others offer various proposals.

I've shown you several in this post.

There is no single "freethinker's system". If you are curious, you can read up on one particular atheistic philosophy. Here's a <a href="http://www.objectivistcenter.org/" target="_blank">link</a>. Keep in mind that this is only ~one~ atheistic system. There are plenty of others.

Grizzly

Hello jojo-sa,

Atheism is silent on the topic of morality and behaviour that will "save us from chaos". EAch one of us is free to pursue and discuss issues related to human behavior and society. Atheism just doesn't extend that far.

Having said that, my own personal beliefs have bee greatly influenced by George Smith and his writings. In one of his books
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0879755776/qid=1011803835/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/102-1028747-2399351" target="_blank">Atheism, Ann Rand, and Other Heresies</a>, Smith extolls the virtues of reasonableness. Here he argues that there are many reasons why people can become atheists, and its really how you come to your atheism that is most telling. Smith argues that one route to becoming an atheist is as a consequence of adopting the "virtue of reasonableness".

From the book


I won't go into this any further, becuase it gets away from the topic of "what does atheism have to offer". I guess the bottom line here is that by being free from religious dogma, I am able to critically examine many ways that may aid me to live a better life for myself, and perhaps for others.

Jamie_L

You make an assumption that atheism claims to be a system for people living on this planet. As explained elsewhere, it is not.

Further implied in the assumption is that religions are such systems. They are not. They are belief systems instructing people about supernatural forces and their relationship with the world. Religions may offer some system for living, but that is secondary to the true purpose of religion, which is to tell you what to believe and how to worship.

Lastly, you imply that such systems (if atheism or religion qualified) should be judged on what they offer humanity. I say they should be judged on whether or not they are likely to be true. Should people be taught to believe in things that don't exist simply because it makes life better?

If atheism has anything to offer humanity, it is a worldview unclouded by mindless, unquestioning faith. A mind steeped in religion and trained to believe without evidence simply on the say-so of authority is easily manipulated. In large groups, such minds can be turned to great destruction and detriment to the human race and its ecosystem.

Jamie

Orpheous99

I think that he is trying to say that one can't be moral unless one beliefs in a god. What he may not realize is that there are far more theists in prisons than there are atheists in comparison to the proportion to their percentage of the general population.

Amos

Hello jojo-sa, if you think that religion has the patent rights to understanding natural law you are wrong. In fact Atheism probably does a much better job of understanding natural law than most religions because religions have an agenda in which natural law is replaced by an artificial system of laws created only for the purpose of understanding the deeper insights of natural law.

In this system the believer is often forcefully send down the garden path to get lost in his own world of ideals. The crisis moment aimed at here is to awaken from all superstitions and return to society with the full knowledge and understanding of the human soul through the moment of realization.

The problem with this is that if religions are not successfull religionists often begin to panic when they are at wits end and that is when things go wrong and is why wars are fought.

In this sense (if I dare say) are atheists much like homosexuals who are often the nicest people you can meet and always peace loving and love serving (don't shoot me for this one, please, but it is just an analogy I see).

Amos

emotional

Let's call him Khaled, then. "Khaled" means "eternal" in Arabic.