Discrimination Against Atheists

[jmkiser 0]

I understand what you're saying semaj, but you'll pardon me if I don't really feel the love when the way they care about me is to bring up Christ. I'll take more substantial friends and being alone over that.

[jmkiser 0]

But you dont' rule out the possibility of a 'god'.Also, you can prove many fantasitcal tales false beyond a reasonable doubt.I just started this through a clarifcation of semantics about people who claim to be athiests but are really, by definitino agnostic.

You can prove the severe unlikelihood of these tales to be untrue... but if people are going to insist on something metaphysical to be true, there's nothing we can scientifically do to tell them that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

[BWToth 0]

I think I used a poorer example than I should have. A better example is that of a hung jury, especially one split right down the middle. There are two factions of people who have decided completely differently based on the same set of evidence. Presumably, after jury selection, we can conclude that these are all rational, intelligent people.

the combination of all members of a hung jury would be like an agnostic.

[BuffDan 0]

I have a question. You are 100% sure beyond a reasonable doubt that there is no such thing as a God. Isn't that just as close minded as those christians who believe with 100% certainty that god Does exist?

Why do people insist that if you are not 100% sure about the non-existence of God, they aren't really an atheist? The type of person who is going to be an atheist isn't 100% sure about anything, as that type of certainty really only exists in the minds of religious people. I myself feel pretty sure there is no God, and I certainly think it is much more likely than not that there is no God, but 100% sure? I am not 100% sure we are not just in a computer simlutation, or that this entire existence isn't all just a dream, but that doesn't stop me from believing that not to be the case.Perhaps this is all just semantics.

[BWToth 0]

Why do people insist that if you are not 100% sure about the non-existence of God, they aren't really an atheist? The type of person who is going to be an atheist isn't 100% sure about anything, as that type of certainty really only exists in the minds of religious people. I myself feel pretty sure there is no God, and I certainly think it is much more likely than not that there is no God, but 100% sure? I am not 100% sure we are not just in a computer simlutation, or that this entire existence isn't all just a dream, but that doesn't stop me from believing that not to be the case.Perhaps this is all just semantics.

i think it is semantics to a degree. but their is just as little proof AGAINST god as their is FOR it. When you really boil is down science cannot explain just as a much about the world as christians or any other religion claim to be able to.maybe it's not 50/50 god v. no god. but it's certaintly not 99% no god...on the spectrum of truth.Atheisism by definition, as i posted earlier, but people don't actually like to read more than one post up, is "denying the existence of the supernatural". That's a bit more bold than saying, i'm leaning toward no god, but i'm really not sure.

[jmkiser 0]

There is a huge difference. Scientists actually explain the world to the highest degree they know how and they work there asses off to discover more.Christians do nothing of the sort. They follow something they think is true and do so with faith... not with facts, proof, evidence, etc.Very huge difference.Even semi-intelligent Christians have to see that their religion has nothing to do with facts, proof, or evidence... they follow their ideals and leave those three things to the real scientists. The sad part is that the worst Christians are the ones who keep trying to fight the reality that science provides.Regarding atheism, Christians are atheistic (new word?) to all gods but their own. Atheists just take it one step further and deny the Christian god, too. In that way, I am one (capital A or no capital a ... I really don't know the difference).

[BWToth 0]

Atheism isn't a synonym for anti-christianity.

[uahphysics 0]

I find it amusing when I say I'm agnostic to people. Many Christians look at that like "Oh, so he REALLY knows... he knows there has to be a God" ... lol, then I look them straight in the face and I tell them that I don't believe God exists... I get the "wtf?! wait a second, you just said you were agnostic" response. Which is when I inform them that I am agnostic because you can't disprove God just like you can't disprove any other fairy tale that people like to create. I say this very openly without any aggression, but it seems like the words themselves stop most Christians from continuing the discussion. And I don't want it to seem like I'm looking for people to start these discussions with. I got a scholarship to a Christian university for tuba so I went for the money matters. I, of course, made quite a few new friends... and in being with friends, you learn things about people.... being "agnostically atheist" (haha my new made-up phrase for the day) seems to be something that spreads fast in a Christian university. Then I get singled out by all of the gung-ho "I can't leave people alone" Christians... bah. Don't worry, though, it wasn't my bad experiences that set me off about the religion. Ever seen the movie Jesus Camp? It's a documentary without a position that follows evangelicals through on of their "camps". They showed two sides... the evangelical's side (which they showed a lot of) and a radio announcer who was doing a show with the position against the actions of the religious fundamentalists. That movie, though, scares the absolute living hell out of me... this is the way people's kids are being raised? The sad thing is, at least they will be so uneducated that they will most likely never achieve any serious positions of importance in this society. That is sad, though These fundamentalists short change their kids so much in life because of their own religious beliefs. AGHHHAGHAGHGHAGHAGHAHGAHHHAAGAGAGH that kills meoh yeah, we're talking about discrimination against atheists. Of course, being an atheist in this country almost has... rebellious tendencies to it because it is against the norm of our society. Therefore, there will always be those active atheist. People see that and peg atheism as these terrible "force your ideas on others" types of people. Just as Muslims are look at as militants... etc etc. Judgments from people who typically are just seeing what they want to see. I, personally (and my own friends who I know don't think God exists), don't search out people to pick my bones with. I like these forums because I am free to voice my opinion and I get many more varieties of a response from different types of people across the world. Otherwise, my mouth is usually as shut as I can keep it. I will say, though, I wish the Christians didn't think that they needed to bug everyone about their beliefs.. call it "witnessing" ... call it being forceful and foreword with your opinions... call it caring... whatever it is, just please stop! And then don't look at us like we're the crazy active ones trying to rid this country of everything dear to it.

I had a sacrcastic comment all typed out, but I respect you and you seem like an intelligent person. I just want to say that if you want to be taken seriously on your argument that atheists are discriminated against, and that they're stereotyped as "these terrible "force your ideas on others" types of people", then it would behoove you to not do the same thing yourself by stereotyping Christians(as seen in the second bolded statement). With love.

[semaj550 0]

There is a huge difference. Scientists actually explain the world to the highest degree they know how and they work there asses off to discover more.Christians do nothing of the sort. They follow something they think is true and do so with faith... not with facts, proof, evidence, etc.Very huge difference.Even semi-intelligent Christians have to see that their religion has nothing to do with facts, proof, or evidence... they follow their ideals and leave those three things to the real scientists. The sad part is that the worst Christians are the ones who keep trying to fight the reality that science provides.Regarding atheism, Christians are atheistic (new word?) to all gods but their own. Atheists just take it one step further and deny the Christian god, too. In that way, I am one (capital A or no capital a ... I really don't know the difference).

To say that science<>theism is utterly false. There are many well educated and well respected scientists who are Christian or who belong to another religion. To think that "science" is choosing sides and only supports atheism is a gross misunderstanding of the facts.Are there Christians who believe things blindly without considering the relevant facts? Absolutely. Does that have anything to say about Christianity itself and its relationship to scientific evidence? Not a bit.It seems to me you have a very narrow and misinformed view of Christians. You seem to want to write off all theists, especially Christians, as unintelligent sheep. This is arrogant, narrow-minded and, above all, false.

[BWToth 0]

What do you think about Atheists?

[jmkiser 0]

I never said that science > theismI was pointing out that they are different... that you can't relate the two. Theism does nothing in the fields of science and science, apparently, has no relativity to theistic beliefs.

[chrisuk_sw 0]

To say that science<>theism is utterly false. There are many well educated and well respected scientists who are Christian or who belong to another religion. To think that "science" is choosing sides and only supports atheism is a gross misunderstanding of the facts.

I agree with you here and also that saying that Christians "have to see that their religion has nothing to do with facts, proof, or evidence... they follow their ideals and leave those three things to the real scientists." is wholely wrong. There are many religious scientists and there is a great deal of scholarly work on religious matters and belief itself, as rigorous and reasoned as their scientific equivalent.I would say that accepting the assumptions of Christianity - Divine Creation, the divinity of Jesus and The Bible - would tend to alter the definition of facts, proof and evidence where the two world-views overlap.

[jmkiser 0]

I had a sacrcastic comment all typed out, but I respect you and you seem like an intelligent person. I just want to say that if you want to be taken seriously on your argument that atheists are discriminated against, and that they're stereotyped as "these terrible "force your ideas on others" types of people", then it would behoove you to not do the same thing yourself by stereotyping Christians(as seen in the second bolded statement). With love.

I appreciate the good natured comment, but I do think you misunderstood my position.I'm against unjustifiable activism. There are many atheists who do nothing but ***** and moan but have nothing upstairs (in the brain if anyone didn't get the reference ) to back up why they are bitching and moaning... or they have no reason to cry because they have never been affected by anything to cry about... you know, the typicals That belief also applies to some Christians.Basically, if you are truly being wronged... I am more then for you speaking up, but if you are going to cry "outrage" that your people are being wronged because they are trying to take prayer out of school.... please learn what it really means to actually be persecuted. And to certain atheists, don't cry outrage or feel wronged just because someone sent you a Christmas card.But regarding the atheists that are fighting for fair treatment, I'm all for it. Many cases that are made seem to be quite sensationalized, but I know more then enough people who say they couldn't consciously deal with people who don't believe in God because of guilty feelings regarding their faith. When you don't believe in God and you have to deal with that, then I understand the frustration and support their right to speak out.I'm sure there are Christians across the world that are persecuted... maybe in other countries. Who knows, maybe there is a Hindu apartment owner who won't rent to Christians... I have no idea. But with the tax breaks given to churches, the way the Bible is used in court, and the spread of the religion across this country... I don't feel bad for them. That would be like me feeling bad for white people because we don't have a national history month.

[jmkiser 0]

I agree with you here and also that saying that Christians "have to see that their religion has nothing to do with facts, proof, or evidence... they follow their ideals and leave those three things to the real scientists." is wholely wrong. There are many religious scientists and there is a great deal of scholarly work on religious matters and belief itself, as rigorous and reasoned as their scientific equivalent.I would say that accepting the assumptions of Christianity - Divine Creation, the divinity of Jesus and The Bible - would tend to alter the definition of facts, proof and evidence where the two world-views overlap.

Where are all these scientists that base their studies off of this Christian faith you speak of? On top of that, it is wrong to say that these scientists who are part of a religion base their discoveries within their religion. Let me rephrase that with an example... If Newton was a Christian, he wouldn't attribute his religion for having anything to do with his studies on gravity. You don't read scientific journals that mention relation to metaphysics as explanations to their discoveries. Just because some scientists have religious faith does not mean that science has any relativity, whatsoever, to religion. Science is separate and is based off facts, proof, evidence, etc. Where in religion is anything like that based off of? "God created the earth in 7 days" has nothing to do with facts, proof, evidence, etc.

[WrongWay 0]

In my experience, most atheists are either really agnostics to just have an axe to grind with organized religion.The funny thing about being an agnostic is that it's really just a place holder. You really have only three options: 1) become an atheist if God proven to you to not exist, 2) become a theist if God is proven to you to exist, or 3) stick your head in the sand and avoid progress.

It is impossible to prove there is no gods, just as it is impossible to prove that talking fish do not exist. There is no evidence indicating that fish can talk, just as there is no evidence of God's existance.... Yet, it can't be proven that there is not a single talking fish.The Bible can be proven incorrect, and therefore by extension, God as it describes it, likely does not exist. However, that is not proof that there is no god.My head is most certainly not "in the sand". I beleive all things, only as strongly as there is evidence to support beleife in them. The evidence for God is non-existant, therefore, my beliefe in God is non-existant.When evidence becomes available, the strength of my belief will change.NO belief should be held absolutly... positivly or negatively.

[WrongWay 0]

a·the·ist –noun; a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. So you're not an atheist at all then.

Yes I am.God of the Bible.... I deny the existance of that supreme being.God of Islam.... I deny the existance of that supreme being.Zeus.. I deny the existance of that supreme being... heck, toss in all the gods of Olympus.Oden... Yep, I deny his existance as well.Name any supreme being or beings... I'll deny the existance of all of them.This strong definition of Atheist is a creation by theists. It is a strawman used to misrepresent and more easily attack our beleif. Atheists, for the most part, reject this strong definition, opting for weaker definition that more closely matches what we actually believe.Theist: one who holds a beleif in God.Atheist: one who does not hold a belief in God.Redefning the word doesn't change what we believe, or what we mean when we apply the label to ourselves.

[WrongWay 0]

Why do people insist that if you are not 100% sure about the non-existence of God, they aren't really an atheist?

Because defining atheism as being 100% sure there is no god makes the position SOOO much easier to attack. See "Strawman Falacy" for more information.

The type of person who is going to be an atheist isn't 100% sure about anything, as that type of certainty really only exists in the minds of religious people.

BINGO!!!!! Most atheists I've come across aren't 100% sure of anything. They base all their beliefs on a scale of strength. The more evidence that supports an idea, the more strongly they beleive the idea to be true.Faith is the opposite of this. Faith is believing something more strongly than the evidence suggests. Taking that "leap".

Perhaps this is all just semantics.

It is very important semantics.There is no word that exactly fits my beliefs.http://www.meriamwebster.com/Atheist: : one who believes that there is no deity Agnostic:1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god2: a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>I don't fit the "dictionary" definition of Atheist since I'm not 100% sure of anything.While I believe untimate reality is unknow and unknowable, I reject this term because of the conatation that I'm not committed to an opinion. I hold my opinion on God very strongly!!!!!! The God of the Bible almost certainly does not exist. Zeus almost certainly does not exist. EACH AND EVERY GOD of every religion on earth is so extremly unlikely to exist, that NO ONE should beleive in any of them.So, you semantic people. What is the word for someone that is comitted to the idea that every God of every religion should not be believed in? A god possible? sure. Throw a name on it or dogma around it, and NO WAY should anyone believe it.The answer is, Atheist.You can find 100 dictionaries that give a different definition. I'll show you 100 million atheists that ignore the dictionary definition of their belief and believe this anyway.

[aucu 3]

Every group (Christians and Athiests included) will have their detractors, but I really want to know what Athiests are being held back from legally that they can't get through the courts if it's illegal discrimination.

Not being allowed to hold public office or testify in court in several states is considered discrimination.

[semaj550 0]

I never said that science > theismI was pointing out that they are different... that you can't relate the two. Theism does nothing in the fields of science and science, apparently, has no relativity to theistic beliefs.

I also didn't say "greater than", I said "not equal to".I was pointing out that you are grossly incorrect to say that you can't relate theism and science. That statement is simply ignorant of the truth.

[BWToth 0]

Yes I am.God of the Bible.... I deny the existance of that supreme being.God of Islam.... I deny the existance of that supreme being.Zeus.. I deny the existance of that supreme being... heck, toss in all the gods of Olympus.Oden... Yep, I deny his existance as well.Name any supreme being or beings... I'll deny the existance of all of them.This strong definition of Atheist is a creation by theists. It is a strawman used to misrepresent and more easily attack our beleif. Atheists, for the most part, reject this strong definition, opting for weaker definition that more closely matches what we actually believe.Theist: one who holds a beleif in God.Atheist: one who does not hold a belief in God.Redefning the word doesn't change what we believe, or what we mean when we apply the label to ourselves.

Ok, what I'm asking you then is how you you make percentages on how SURE you are that no god exists?How do you explain that fact that you are agnostic as well, are the two not mutally exclusive?

[jmkiser 0]

I also didn't say "greater than", I said "not equal to".I was pointing out that you are grossly incorrect to say that you can't relate theism and science. That statement is simply ignorant of the truth.

A truth that you have not pointed out yet, sir, because it doesn't exist. What about theism has science delved into?... and I mean this question in a practical sense.

[semaj550 0]

A truth that you have not pointed out yet, sir, because it doesn't exist. What about theism has science delved into?... and I mean this question in a practical sense.

Here is a list of theistic scientists: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.htmlNo doubt they are too obscure for you to have heard of though.Here is an essay on specifically Christian scientists and their work: http://www.tektonics.org/scim/sciencemony.htm

[jmkiser 0]

I read a lot about being "motivated" by their faith, but my point still stands unchallenged.The discoveries have no basis in faith... only in reality.Also, being religious is just as much a traditional ideal then an active belief. But again... my point still rings true.

[semaj550 0]

I read a lot about being "motivated" by their faith, but my point still stands unchallenged.The discoveries have no basis in faith... only in reality.Also, being religious is just as much a traditional ideal then an active belief. But again... my point still rings true.

So something has to be based completely outside of reality to be considered faith?

[jmkiser 0]

I never said that.But answer this... What important part of the Christian religion has to do with what is real... ? Give me something that can be touched, studied, examined...