Saw this question on r/atheism today.

[Hayabusa Rider]

Thats up to debate now. One site has no claim of reason other than they won't deliver to that person another claims "Apparently, soon after the suit, a local florist refused to deliver a dozen red roses to Ahlquist, citing “religious reasons” for the botanical snub.". Since the person is well known to the area to be an Atheist, the logical conclusion for one giving "religious reasons" its because of an objection to her non-theistic lifestyle or it is in retaliation to having an illegal display that agrees with their theistic belief taken down. Then again thats up to the court to decide.

I'm not sure how that would work. We're not talking a protected class.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I think you're really stretching the limits of credulity here. The atheist was discriminated against on a religious basis, regardless of the fact that his atheism isn't a religion per se. If a Christian discriminates against a Muslim because the Muslim is not a Christian, it is no different when the Christian discriminates against an atheist because the atheist is not a Christian.

There is no religious test for citizenship, so when a person A denies another person B his rights as a citizen (that is, to be treated equally as other citizens) because B fails to meet A's own personal religious test, A is guilty of religious discrimination, regardless of person B's religion or lack thereof.

That may be true. What have the courts ruled?

 

[OCNewbie]

Free will is a bitch isn't it? Of course people fail, of course people bargain with themselves and attempt to with God, of course people get lazy. The point is God, and only God, will judge you for your sins when you have died. God did NOT want to give a list of rules to live by. He relented and said he would but, that we wouldn't like them. Why? Because, humans are incapable of living sin free lives. Do not judge the belief in God by the people who practice religion poorly.

What's the point of those rules if we don't really have to follow them? There is just nothing rational about religion. What rational reason is there to believe that the Bible is more than just a book, as any other book is a book? If the Bible loses credibility, then the entire Christian faith carries that loss along with it.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

That may be true. What have the courts ruled?

I don't know, tbh. In your opinion, would this have been a more "open and shut case" if the person had identified himself as a "secular humanist" instead of just an "atheist"?

You should understand that atheism is not a religion for the same reasons theism is not a religion. They are rather attributes or characteristics of different worldviews.

It seems like desperation to defend a pretty clear case of discrimination on the grounds of a semantic loophole like the one you are attempting -- as though fair and equal treatment of people is not among your values.

 

[nehalem256]

I don't know, tbh. In your opinion, would this have been a more "open and shut case" if the person had identified himself as a "secular humanist" instead of just an "atheist"?

You should understand that atheism is not a religion for the same reasons theism is not a religion. They are rather attributes or characteristics of different worldviews.

It seems like desperation to defend a pretty clear case of discrimination on the grounds of a semantic loophole like the one you are attempting -- as though fair and equal treatment of people is not among your values.

It seems to me that people will consider Atheism alternatively a religion/not a religion when it is convenient for their purposes.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Can't remember the last time I saw a thread trying to discuss a serious subject, where so many posts have said so little.

As Bill Maher said, atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position. But theists very much want to claim that it's also a religion, because that's a convenient excuse for them to not have to challenge the basis for their own beliefs.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

It seems to me that people will consider Atheism alternatively a religion/not a religion when it is convenient for their purposes.

Like who?

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

What's the point of those rules if we don't really have to follow them? There is just nothing rational about religion. What rational reason is there to believe that the Bible is more than just a book, as any other book is a book? If the Bible loses credibility, then the entire Christian faith carries that loss along with it.

The point is to learn what to strive for. Life isn't a game to be 'won,' it's a journey to better yourself and those around you. It takes a leap of faith. From my viewpoint, the example that Jesus gave us makes a lot of sense. C'mon in, the water's fine.

 

[88keys]

Here's one I saw today.

http://www.abc6.com/story/20932258/...t-cranston-florist-for-not-delivering-flowers

Edit: Here's some interesting background info on this.

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/03/rho..._refusing_to_deliver_flowers_to_atheist_teen/

Because that's totally the same as wanting to ban gays from getting married or out law abortion. The difference is that the prayer mural was unconstitutional. She was not using any kind of atheist sorcery or control to remove that mural.

And speaking of control, I guess you could call it control when someone refuses to do business with you based on religious differences.

I'm not sure how that would work. We're not talking a protected class.

Yes we are because we are all protected under the civil rights act. The florists discriminated against the atheist based on religion. Which in this case would mean, not having one. You choose to interpret atheism as a religion when it suits your purpose when

That may be true. What have the courts ruled?

I know what the courts have rules. And that doesn't necessarily make it so other than a legal definition.

Perhaps that was easier than amending the civil rights act to include non religion.

People are already irrational. Go look at hitler and mousallini and the emporer of Japan, and China, and north korea, and Russia, and Cuba. What did the lack of religion do for the communists and the dictators? I dont think Religion has anything to do with irrational behaviour. Power corrupts.

Hitler claimed to be a Christian. But other than that I suppose that qualifies as support the latter part of the question.

Atheists and Religious people are both irrational. They both have a belief in something that is not provable.

Well you can't disprove the existence of a god because you can't disprove a negative. You can however discredit and disprove the validity of individual religions through science, historical record, etc.

 

[88keys]

Please use a modicum of logic in your arguments if you wish to be taken seriously. OTOH, wtf is this topic doing in P & N?

I am colorblind so I missed the red highlighted text and I though you just quoted my entire post and added your 'witty' response at the end. May I suggest bold or italics if you do not wish to bother with quote tags?


No where did I imply you believed correlation = causation. I asked you to demonstrate that there WAS a correlation.

What you obviously don't understand is that I have not accepted anything yet as being fact, I'm only speculating at this point.


No where in the Bible does it quote God, Jesus or, the Holy Spirit stating the Earth is 6,000 years old. Evolution does not disprove religion, scientific discoveries do not disprove religion. The fact that you believe most people throughout history have been/are irrational tends to belie your claims.

Young Earth Creationism is a belief that was widely held among early Christians. Although it was not explicitly stated that the earth is 6000 years old, they have determined this number based on literal interpenetration of scripture. But as for things that are stated like the earth, sun and moon being created in 6 days, and Adam being created from dirt and Eve from Adam's rib. We know this to be false. This along with many other errors leads one to the undeniable conclusion that the bible was written by men who had no understanding of science which inherently debunks Judaism, Christianity and Islam.





The fact that some people of all religions can and do commit atrocities in the name of their religion does not negate, invalidate nor, disprove their religion.

Uhhhh. did I say that it did?


Are people just simply irrational and violent by their nature and would be so with or without religion?

Some people are. You have failed to show that most are or, that most of those who do are religious.

That was a question, not a statement of fact.

But if you must ask. If you look at mankind violent history and tendency to believe ridiculous notions without evidence, whether you're talking about Mayan Sacrifices, Jonestown, or 9/11, Nazi Germany, And the collapse of many great civilizations all have to do with poor judgement on the part of human beings so I would have to accept that human beings by and large are irrational and even the most rational amongst us are capable of being irrational at times.

That being said. I would again lean toward the latter part of the question.


The same concept can be applied to political ideologies. Conservatism to Fascism, Liberalism to Socialism, Libertarianism to Anarchy, Skepticism to Close Minded. You can take any idea whether religious or political and take it to dangerous extremes, and perhaps the less rational one is, the more likely to take something to an extreme.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

MTB: No where did I imply you believed correlation = causation. I asked you to demonstrate that there WAS a correlation.

88keys: What you obviously don't understand is that I have not accepted anything yet as being fact, I'm only speculating at this point.

88keys:

There is no correlation between milk drinkers and irrationality, but there is obviously one between irrationality and religion.

MTB: I'd say that pretty clearly states what you believe in.

MTB: No where in the Bible does it quote God, Jesus or, the Holy Spirit stating the Earth is 6,000 years old. Evolution does not disprove religion, scientific discoveries do not disprove religion. The fact that you believe most people throughout history have been/are irrational tends to belie your claims.

88keys: Young Earth Creationism is a belief that was widely held among early Christians. Although it was not explicitly stated that the earth is 6000 years old, they have determined this number based on literal interpenetration of scripture. But as for things that are stated like the earth, sun and moon being created in 6 days, and Adam being created from dirt and Eve from Adam's rib. We know this to be false. This along with many other errors leads one to the undeniable conclusion that the bible was written by men who had no understanding of science which inherently debunks Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

MTB: How exactly does a lack of knowledge regarding the understanding of science today debunk Judaism, Christianity and Islam? You are taking both old and new testaments as literal when you don't even believe in it? Is that rational?

MTB: The fact that some people of all religions can and do commit atrocities in the name of their religion does not negate, invalidate nor, disprove their religion.

88keys: Uhhhh. did I say that it did?

88keys: Considering all of the hatred and bigotry in the world and how often religious beliefs are used as an excuse for this. The best, most current example of religion and hate would be Islam. They commit endless atrocities in the name of their god. Christianity don't exactly have a clean slate either historically speaking.

MTB: Why yes, I believe you did.

88keys: Are people just simply irrational and violent by their nature and would be so with or without religion?

MTB:Some people are. You have failed to show that most are or, that most of those who do are religious.

88keys: That was a question, not a statement of fact.

MTB: If the foundation of your question is flawed ie. you have demonstrated no correlation between being religious and being irrational, then the question is meaningless.

88keys: The same concept can be applied to political ideologies. Conservatism to Fascism, Liberalism to Socialism, Libertarianism to Anarchy, Skepticism to Close Minded. You can take any idea whether religious or political and take it to dangerous extremes, and perhaps the less rational one is, the more likely to take something to an extreme.

MTB: We agree, taking flawed idealism to extremes is bad...kind of like yours?
__________________

 

[88keys]

MTB: No where in the Bible does it quote God, Jesus or, the Holy Spirit stating the Earth is 6,000 years old. Evolution does not disprove religion, scientific discoveries do not disprove religion. The fact that you believe most people throughout history have been/are irrational tends to belie your claims.

88keys: Young Earth Creationism is a belief that was widely held among early Christians. Although it was not explicitly stated that the earth is 6000 years old, they have determined this number based on literal interpenetration of scripture. But as for things that are stated like the earth, sun and moon being created in 6 days, and Adam being created from dirt and Eve from Adam's rib. We know this to be false. This along with many other errors leads one to the undeniable conclusion that the bible was written by men who had no understanding of science which inherently debunks Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

MTB: How exactly does a lack of knowledge regarding the understanding of science today debunk Judaism, Christianity and Islam? You are taking both old and new testaments as literal when you don't even believe in it? Is that rational?

88Keys: Because it proves that it was written by men, not by a supreme all knowing being which implies that the religion is a farce. What does my literal interpretation with the bible and lack of faith have to do with rationality? Am I supposed to make things up as I go along to suit my narrative?


MTB: The fact that some people of all religions can and do commit atrocities in the name of their religion does not negate, invalidate nor, disprove their religion.

88keys: Uhhhh. did I say that it did?



MTB: Why yes, I believe you did.

88keys: Considering all of the hatred and bigotry in the world and how often religious beliefs are used as an excuse for this. The best, most current example of religion and hate would be Islam. They commit endless atrocities in the name of their god. Christianity don't exactly have a clean slate either historically speaking.

Ummmmm NO.
Please explain how the above statement disproves, or invalidates religion

88keys: Are people just simply irrational and violent by their nature and would be so with or without religion?

MTB:Some people are. You have failed to show that most are or, that most of those who do are religious.

88keys: Actually I did, and you choose not to address the evidence.

88keys: That was a question, not a statement of fact.

MTB: If the foundation of your question is flawed ie. you have demonstrated no correlation between being religious and being irrational, then the question is meaningless.

But it's not my question, it's someone else's question that I found interesting. But if you think there is no correlation between one's irrationality and believing in what essentially are bronze age fairy tales, than I can't help you
88keys: The same concept can be applied to political ideologies. Conservatism to Fascism, Liberalism to Socialism, Libertarianism to Anarchy, Skepticism to Close Minded. You can take any idea whether religious or political and take it to dangerous extremes, and perhaps the less rational one is, the more likely to take something to an extreme.

MTB: We agree, taking flawed idealism to extremes is bad...kind of like yours?
__________________[/QUOTE]

And how do you suppose I'm taking my beliefs to extremes? I'm not conspiring to commit a coupe detat to take over the government and destroy religion. I'm not burning down churches, or persecuting Christians.

 

[Retro Rob]

There is just nothing rational about religion.

The peak of irrationality is claiming to know the unknowable -- claiming to know that there is a God really isn't much different than claiming to know how the Universe came into existence in absence of said "creator".

 

[LunarRay]

The peak of irrationality is claiming to know the unknowable -- claiming to know that there is a God really isn't much different than claiming to know how the Universe came into existence in absence of said "creator".

One might argue that they can look about and see a universe... but not see a creator... IF the universe exists then it came into being or always was but we can't say the same for a creator.... unless you've some evidence of the creator's existence...

I'd not argue that but you could...

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

The peak of irrationality is claiming to know the unknowable -- claiming to know that there is a God really isn't much different than claiming to know how the Universe came into existence in absence of said "creator".

Who has claimed this?

 

[shadow9d9]

The peak of irrationality is claiming to know the unknowable -- claiming to know that there is a God really isn't much different than claiming to know how the Universe came into existence in absence of said "creator".

No. One is making up evidence of a godlike creature(only one is the fad nowadays). One is pointing out that there is no proof WHATSOEVER of it. These two are not the same.

Using factual knowledge to speculate about the creation of the universe is just that.. speculation. No one is claiming to "know" how the universe came into existence. None in science anyway.

 

[OCNewbie]

The peak of irrationality is claiming to know the unknowable -- claiming to know that there is a God really isn't much different than claiming to know how the Universe came into existence in absence of said "creator".

You mean like the Big Bang theory? That's a scientific theory, if I'm not mistaken, that is open to modification if more advanced technology and/or research provides better insight into that event. It's my understanding that God's existence isn't open to scrutiny, within the community that supports that existence, in the same manner that the BB theory is.

 

[Agent11]

There are many rational reasons to follow religion, mostly social ones, although some people take comfort from their beliefs, and that can be a reason in and of itself.

For me atheism is simply the intellectual rejection of religion and the acceptance of not having all the answers to all of my questions.

 

[klinc]

The question is where does religion come from?

 

[Nemesis 1]

I have refused to sell many people computers . ON moral grounds . If you try to buy a water cooled gaming PC from me . The vary first thing that is required by me for you to purchase one . You have to show me your W2 , If you don't make $100,000 a year I will not sell you a $10,000-$15,000 gaming computer. RACE has nothing to do withit . Religion has nothing to do with it . I decide who can afford my machines no one else. So I do discriminate against the poor . SUE me .

 

[Nemesis 1]

The question is where does religion come from?

Thats easy . From the top evil people down to the lowly . enforced by threat of death that where religion sprang from . Its all about control and creating a boggyman . People really need to live 1 day at a time. For some there is no reality here . Maybe so . There is 1 reality that applies to all beliefs . We are 7 billion and our resources can't sustain such a population of 7 billion and growing. I know this and the powers that be know this. So dismissing conspirecy theories and such are for the weak of mind and poor of spirit.
Believers Vs. None believers its come full circle . As it was in the beginning so shall it be at the end . What does this referr to . I will tell you . In the beginning Christians where put to death for their beliefs . The next period Christians are excepted and gain positions of power . The next period is set up Where christians kill none -believers and have fallen away from the teachings . Than we have Napolean Which breaks the power of the church . The church is later restored by Nazi types. Today the church is weal and falling apart . The next stepp the final step. Religion is replaced by something new . and we come full circle as true christians are now put to death . Game over . NAture choosies sides the true christians win . Not 1 monkey among them .

 

[klinc]

Thats easy . From the top evil people down to the lowly . enforced by threat of death that where religion sprang from . Its all about control and creating a boggyman . People really need to live 1 day at a time. For some there is no reality here . Maybe so . There is 1 reality that applies to all beliefs . We are 7 billion and our resources can't sustain such a population of 7 billion and growing. I know this and the powers that be know this. So dismissing conspirecy theories and such are for the weak of mind and poor of spirit.
Believers Vs. None believers its come full circle . As it was in the beginning so shall it be at the end . What does this referr to . I will tell you . In the beginning Christians where put to death for their beliefs . The next period Christians are excepted and gain positions of power . The next period is set up Where christians kill none -believers and have fallen away from the teachings . Than we have Napolean Which breaks the power of the church . The church is later restored by Nazi types. Today the church is weal and falling apart . The next stepp the final step. Religion is replaced by something new . and we come full circle as true christians are now put to death . Game over . NAture choosies sides the true christians win . Not 1 monkey among them .

or the short answer

From your parents

 

[Retro Rob]

No. One is making up evidence of a godlike creature(only one is the fad nowadays). One is pointing out that there is no proof WHATSOEVER of it. These two are not the same.

I think you're approaching this the wrong way. Belief in God and scienticfic research, in their noblest forms, is really the search for truth - they're trying to find answers to sincere questions.

I think the problems with both is that science seems to also be concerned with "proving" that belief in God is irrational, as if belief in God is somehow rejection of science, or visa versa. This is dogma... calling someone irrational for basically believing different than you regardless the reason.

For me, my belief in God and science compliment each other just fine, as they should. My proof? To be honest, science does a great job of studying the human body, this actually helps me appreciate and deepen my faith in God when I see such good design and "purpose". Without science, I would say that my belief in God would be without sufficent proof.

If scientists and cosmologists want to speculate about how this all happened, then they're free to do that. The study of the planets (particualry the earth) just has the opposite affect on someone like myself -- the more organization I see, the more I see intelligence in its design I see, and the better I rationalize my belief in God.

 

[Ausm]

That's their call to make. And I don't provide much of a revenue stream to my church, frankly. Apart from the odd $0.50 in spare change I might have on Sunday for the collections.

Don't you think these people are capable of making the decisions themselves without someone trying to indoctrinate them? Why do you people think you know what's good for other people's lives?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Belief in gods is not a "search for truth".

Searching for truth means looking at evidence and using reason and knowledge to determine what's true. Religion goes in the other direction -- it starts with declarations of what is true, and then tries to fit the evidence into that framework.

Both may claim to be related to understanding truth, but they are going about it in a very different way. Scientists are open to new ideas and evidence that challenge the status quo, if this would improve our understanding of reality. Most religions are not only not open to such challenges, they are actively hostile towards them.