Atheist life vs religious life

[umop ap!sdn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaOVPaYf780

Very well made video that talks about a lot of different aspects of atheism, some of which I hadn't thought of before. I watched some of the video responses hoping for a rational two sided debate but was disappointed to not hear any opposing viewpoints that were anywheres near as intelligently articulated as the original video.

[Lance]

We're sorry, this video is no longer available.

[umop ap!sdn]

That's odd.... it still works for me. Can you see the info at right? It's a transcript of the entire narration.

[KLA2]

Huh. Worked for me, Lance.

Good video, umop. Really nothing there that I had not considered. Hope some religionists watch it, and think.

Unfortunately, I find many religionists have utterly closed minds. Among other reasons, (IMHO) this is because their "belief" structure is so absurd and fragile, it will crack and disintegrate if they even consider scientific facts, reason or logic.

Plus, they are so afraid of the "boogie man" monitoring their every thought, that they are afraid to think. Just regurgitate dogma, and threaten everyone who does not do so with hellfire. Sad.

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

... and threaten everyone who does not do so with hellfire.

Not very effective that.

[MM_Dandy]

I've only had the time to read the comments which list 5 advantages. Here's my response to these:

1. Atheists can make moral decisions based on the specific context.

Not every religion touts "Thou shalt not lie" as an absolute rule. Even among those that do, many members (and I would say %99.9 or more) do not strictly adhere to it. In other words, they also make the moral decision based on the context.

2. Atheists can experience healthy outrage at the outrageous without fear of questioning God's plan.

Not all religions maintain that there is only one God in control of all things, or that the wishes of all deities work in union. Even within Christianity, arguments arise as to what degree God is omniscient or omnipotent. That being said, I'm not quite sure if he is thinking of the Job story here. Even though the character Job never curses God for all of the bad things, Job does express great anger, and he grieves and mourns. So, yes, there is the fear of questioning God's plan, but that doesn't, at least the way I see it, preclude the expression of healthy outrage. But then, this is perhaps only applicable to those who strictly adhere to that fear, which is what Job was made out to be.

3. Atheist can be friends with everyone without having the thought in the back of their mind that this person's lifestyle may be evil.

I disagree that atheists have such an advantage. There are such people out there that would cause you harm, even if you are an atheist (or even because you are one), and I would say that the author would consider that not good, if not evil.

5. Atheists do not live with the fear of hell.

This is true. Is this an advantage? Also, as before, not all religions have concepts like Heaven and Hell.

7. Atheists raise freethinking children; let them pick a religion, or none.

It's not quite changing religions or converting to atheism, but none of my parents' children belong to the denomination in which we were raised. Heck, we're not even all Protestant anymore. Perhaps one of the most shocking things I've ever heard from my dad was when he encouraged me to convert to Catholicism when I got married. This seems to be another case where the advantage is only enjoyed over those who strictly adhere to their version of religion.

And that's all he had in the comments. I'll respond to the rest of his advantages when I have some more time.

[Мастер]

I've always had a strange feeling about the way people choose their religions. Perhaps I am naive, but I thought that when you were a member of religion X, that meant that you hold the beliefs that characterize that religion.

As such, it seems to me that if you believe religion X, you ought to do so because you see some evidence that the beliefs that characterize religion X are true. This idea of choosing what to believe based on the advantages or disadvantages of your choice, not based on whether you think it is true or not, seems a bit odd to me.

But many things people do seem odd to me. Probably some of the things I do seem odd to them...

[Lance]

It's working for me now. Must have been an RBE*

(*Random Bizarre Event)

Unfortunately, I find many religionists have utterly closed minds.

Do they really? I find that they are very open and willing to listen, as long as what's being said to them doesn't appear to have been inspired by Satan. (Which would be anything that disagrees with what they believe.)

[umop ap!sdn]

I cross-posted this video to another site, and it's gotten quite a few responses. Someone pointed it out that the video really only addresses the fundies and extremists of the Big Three (AKA the desert dogmas, my new favorite expression even if it's the wrong plural form) and that most religious folks agree with so much of the video anyway. Which I thought was interesting and kinda cool.

it seems to me that if you believe religion X, you ought to do so because you see some evidence that the beliefs that characterize religion X are true. This idea of choosing what to believe based on the advantages or disadvantages of your choice, not based on whether you think it is true or not, seems a bit odd to me.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

It's working for me now. Must have been an RBE*

(*Random Bizarre Event)

Gremlins?

[Heid the Ba]

Some of us follow the Dessert Dogma, it comes after the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[umop ap!sdn]

[Enzo]

The father, the son, and the Tira Misu.

The dessert dogmas, I like that.

We must also watch for the new Pastafarians from Italy. They play Ragu music.

[Arneb]

[Gillianren mode]
The word you are looking for is tirami su (=Pull me up).
[/Gillianren mode]

Pastafarianism? Long pesto bsolete.

[KLA2]

MM_Dandy replied to:

3. Atheist can be friends with everyone without having the thought in the back of their mind that this person's lifestyle may be evil.

Saying:

I disagree that atheists have such an advantage. There are such people out there that would cause you harm, even if you are an atheist (or even because you are one), and I would say that the author would consider that not good, if not evil.

This was a two minute narrative, not a detailed book. I think we can reasonably assume that the author was not referring to homicidal maniacs, people filled with irrational hate and violence, wife beaters or child molesters, etc.

I assumed he was talking about folks who engage in harmless sexual practices with consenting adults, wear different hats, wear their hair long/short out of step with fashion, are of different races/cultures/colour, read books instead of watching TV, etc. (Some of which the graphic implied.) :wink:

[KLA2]

I've always had a strange feeling about the way people choose their religions. Perhaps I am naive, but I thought that when you were a member of religion X, that meant that you hold the beliefs that characterize that religion.

As such, it seems to me that if you believe religion X, you ought to do so because you see some evidence that the beliefs that characterize religion X are true. This idea of choosing what to believe based on the advantages or disadvantages of your choice, not based on whether you think it is true or not, seems a bit odd to me.

But many things people do seem odd to me. Probably some of the things I do seem odd to them...

Sadly, KOS, it seems to me that most people do not choose their religions, their religions choose them.

The indoctrination of most people begins at a tender and impressionable age. Freethinking, questioning or saying "No" is not an option. By the time they reach an age where they might question, it is too late for most. Brainwashing and social pressures ensure that they will "believe" rather than ever question, think and challenge.

[Enzo]

[Enzo mode] OH YEAH???!!!??? [/Enzo mode]

Well, Olive Garden makes it one word. And who would know more about Italian than Olive Garden, Hmmm?



Nothing more holy than this stuff

[MM_Dandy]

This was a two minute narrative, not a detailed book. I think we can reasonably assume that the author was not referring to homicidal maniacs, people filled with irrational hate and violence, wife beaters or child molesters, etc.

I assumed he was talking about folks who engage in harmless sexual practices with consenting adults, wear different hats, wear their hair long/short out of step with fashion, are of different races/cultures/colour, read books instead of watching TV, etc. (Some of which the graphic implied.) :wink:

Sorry, I haven't seen the narrative on this particular point, and without the proper context, I took the transcript more literally than I should have.

Using your examples for what a religious person might consider evil, though, I still don't see where any advantage is. A fundamental assumption of Christainity, for instance, is that everyone is sinful. If everyone is sinful, wondering if your associate is sinful is useless. In fact, we are generally taught to treat a person seperately from their sins, something along the lines of "hate the sin, love the sinner." In theory, we should be even less concerned about the "evil-doings" of our friends than an atheist (Oh, so you are an axe-murderer? Well, we can still be friends, right?) In practice, though, we're a bit more reasonable (Oh, so you are an axe-murderer? See ya.) - we're not perfect, after all.

[KLA2]

Yes, MM_Dandy. Again, I must emphasize that my grievance is with those who take religion to an extreme, hateful and harmful degree, not the majority of fine, decent, reasonable people who believe, but also accept science and embrace compassion.

Namaste. {"I honor the Spirit in you which is also in me."} :)

[Enzo]

Hava Nice-day {"Thank you, enjoy your Arby."}

[umop ap!sdn]

I still don't understand how a person can murder an axe.

....

And I hope I never do.

[Enzo]

I'm sorry you're stumped. It's a cutting edge procedure. I don't have time to go into it thoroughly now, and I don't want to do a hatchet job on the topic. Bare axe me about it later, next time you ... log on.

[Lance]

A fundamental assumption of Christainity, for instance, is that everyone is sinful.

You mean, when we ment for lunch at Z'Kota Grill that time, you thought I was a sinner?

[MM_Dandy]

Um, well, sure. Though, in the nicest possible way, of course. :)

[Enzo]

Sinner at dinner, it's a winner.

[KLA2]

You mean, when we ment for lunch at Z'Kota Grill that time, you thought I was a sinner?

Only when you did not pick up the cheque. :wink: