New Atheist Billboards in California:"I Believe in Humanity, Not god"

[Tom_Wescott]

The problem with organised religions is that they have the nasty habit of restricting what your dreams and aspirations should be.

Somebody's pissed that he lives in the UK and can't look at as much porn as we Yankees can.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

The real issue I have with atheists, c.d., is that they miss one fundamental point. It is part of the human make-up to dream.

The problem with organised religions is that they have the nasty habit of restricting what your dreams and aspirations should be.

[RivkahChaya]

I can't speak for American atheists, but how can you possibly know the percentage of believers and non-believers who donate to every charitable organisation, regardless of who runs it, paid or unpaid? The donations come from all and sundry, and nobody (I sincerely hope) is ever asked if they believe in God. They just keep on givin' regardless.

Except when I give money to buy Xmas gifts for children in foster care or battered women's homes, or other types of situations (a synagogue I belonged to used to organize the gifts for a women's shelter every year), I stick to Jewish charities, but I give to non-religion based non-profits as well, and I'm sure lots of the donors are atheists.

However, I know, because of Christopher Hitchens' research, that non-Catholics donated millions to Mother Teresa, thinking she'd use it in her hospitals or hospices, but she didn't. Most of it sat in banks, doing nothing, while small amounts went to anti-abortion propaganda.

I might have thought of giving to Christian charities before I read that, but now I absolutely would not.

But yeah-- in the US, anyway, it's pretty easy to find a charity that is not faith-based, if you have some extra time or money. I worked two afternoons a month for several years at a non-faith based free kitchen in Manhattan, and another one in Indiana.

[Robert]

One cannot directly deduce a moral course of action from a religious book. This is because human beings, unlike gods, have to live in the real world.

For instance, Christianity may preach peace but there won't have been many Christians who thought it right to let the Nazis murder at will, in the interests of peace. One has to calculate the consequences of an action or policy. The only thing one can deduce from a religious book, is the overall aim : the world is a better place without Hitler.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Tom, the true Islamic religion certainly does not support terrorism. Like Christianity and Judaism, true Islam preaches peace and tolerance.

However, as you say, violence and evil have been practised in the name of both and there are contradictions within the teachings. For example, the Old Testament teaches 'an eye for an eye' and so on, whereas Jesus told the multitudes 'a new covenant I give unto you - that you love one another'.

It is clear that, within humanity, all sorts of groups and ideologies have visited terrible evil on others. These have been both religious and political ideologies and no single group or idea holds an absolute moral ground.

Julie,

There isn't a 'true Islam', nor a 'true Christianity'.

There are contradictions in both of these holy books, and really interpretation is a personal choice. Clearly the people who follow both religions are not an homogeneous group who share the same interpretation.

The experience in England tells us that 99.9% of muslims do not engage in terrorist acts, and that in itself tells a story. There are those who tacitly support it on the basis that the British Government is an occupying force, whether or not you see logic in this sentiment is another matter; but I would say the majority of British muslims do not support terrorist acts in any way, shape or form.

I do feel, however, that anyone not loyal to this country shouldn't be here. This is a country with certain traditions and a certain history. It is a feature of English history that millions of Irish catholics have migrated here over the years. You would be hard pressed to find any descendant of these migrants who would claim to be Irish. I grew up in an area probably 60/40 Protestant/Catholic but not one of these catholics would consider themselves to be anything but an Englishman, and this is in a country with Protestant heritage; they have accepted that and bent to the way we do things. And, that's the way it has to be: not living here with loyalty to Pakistan.

It is a feature of prosperous nations that they are united, and if anyone living here does not like the we way are, our culture, our history then the question has to be asked: "why are you here, then? why don't you go to wherever it is you think is your home country?"

[Limehouse]

I should say you're describing Muslims. While only a small portion practice terrorism, the religion as a whole condones and supports it. The same of course is not true with Christianity or Judaism, which as a whole condemns such behavior, although certainly evil has been done in the name of both.

As for atheists, I think my comments were more about the girl in the billboard and those who support her. She's like a Sickert theorist in that her hypothesis is flawed and invalid so shouldn't be advertised. And atheists are guilty of quite a bit here in the states. The moral landslide of the last half century or so, for instance. Closer to a century, perhaps.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom, the true Islamic religion certainly does not support terrorism. Like Christianity and Judaism, true Islam preaches peace and tolerance.

However, as you say, violence and evil have been practised in the name of both and there are contradictions within the teachings. For example, the Old Testament teaches 'an eye for an eye' and so on, whereas Jesus told the multitudes 'a new covenant I give unto you - that you love one another'.

It is clear that, within humanity, all sorts of groups and ideologies have visited terrible evil on others. These have been both religious and political ideologies and no single group or idea holds an absolute moral ground.

[Limehouse]

The real issue I have with atheists, c.d., is that they miss one fundamental point. It is part of the human make-up to dream. We're not these logic, rational beings that walk this earth in a state of reason. Although to be fair, it is reasonable to believe in a God.

There will be no one on this board who is more of a humanist than me, by nature. I've never been interested in what is happening in the sky, be it aliens, God, the universe; I'm solely concerned with the here and now in my corner of the world, by nature.

The thread started to move into 'herd mentality', but I think there's a layer above that. People like order and hierarchy, and I'd accept that submission and belonging is a part of that, but it's the tool to a wider objective: order.

It would be an unbelievably dull world if we all looked to science for the answers, and an unachievable world as our experience tells us science certainly doesn't have all of the answers.

Like it or not, atheists do not have the one true path to salvation, nor does anybody else, and it's the arrogance of certainty in an uncertain world that causes consternation.

I would mention the left-wing types at this point, but Julie will be along within seconds to start a war with me (she has a bell that goes off when the words 'left-wing' are typed). Only pulling your leg Julie!

Actually Mac, I agree with everything you have written in this post!

[Errata]

I should say you're describing Muslims. While only a small portion practice terrorism, the religion as a whole condones and supports it. The same of course is not true with Christianity or Judaism, which as a whole condemns such behavior, although certainly evil has been done in the name of both.

As for atheists, I think my comments were more about the girl in the billboard and those who support her. She's like a Sickert theorist in that her hypothesis is flawed and invalid so shouldn't be advertised. And atheists are guilty of quite a bit here in the states. The moral landslide of the last half century or so, for instance. Closer to a century, perhaps.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Oh atheists haven't caused moral decline. Atheists are highly moral. They have to be. They don't have the option of expiation or somehow cosmically making it right in some nebulous future.

No it's the self indulgent who are responsible for moral decline. Also the paranoid, the indignant, the selfish, the disconnected and the stubborn. Highly evolved morals require a strong tie to a community, the ability to empathize, and the ability to shift values as required. Someone rigidly bound to an ancient code of ethics is just as amoral as someone with no ethics. And there are any number of religious people who cannot differentiate between justice and punishment, or perseverance and persecution. Moral action requires flexibility. Morals themselves don't, but what is the using of having them if you aren't going to act on them.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom,

First of all thanks for the compliment...well, sort of. I can't remember ever expressing anger towards God in any of my posts let alone rampant anger. Now I will admit to having a great dislike for people who spread evil in the world in the name of religion. And that is not limited to Christians (or more precisely to people who think they are practicing Christianity but who wouldn't know Christianity if it flew up their ass). All you have to do is look around the world and you will find all manner of evil being perpetrated in the name of religion. Does religion do good things? Absolutely. But I see no point in turning a blind eye to the bad that it also does.

You started this thread by bad mouthing atheists as though they were guilty of something simply by being atheists. I simply attempted to point out that atheists are not the ones behind so much of what is wrong with the world today. That is all I did.

c.d.

I should say you're describing Muslims. While only a small portion practice terrorism, the religion as a whole condones and supports it. The same of course is not true with Christianity or Judaism, which as a whole condemns such behavior, although certainly evil has been done in the name of both.

As for atheists, I think my comments were more about the girl in the billboard and those who support her. She's like a Sickert theorist in that her hypothesis is flawed and invalid so shouldn't be advertised. And atheists are guilty of quite a bit here in the states. The moral landslide of the last half century or so, for instance. Closer to a century, perhaps.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fleetwood Mac]

You started this thread by bad mouthing atheists as though they were guilty of something simply by being atheists. I simply attempted to point out that atheists are not the ones behind so much of what is wrong with the world today. That is all I did.

c.d.

The real issue I have with atheists, c.d., is that they miss one fundamental point. It is part of the human make-up to dream. We're not these logic, rational beings that walk this earth in a state of reason. Although to be fair, it is reasonable to believe in a God.

There will be no one on this board who is more of a humanist than me, by nature. I've never been interested in what is happening in the sky, be it aliens, God, the universe; I'm solely concerned with the here and now in my corner of the world, by nature.

The thread started to move into 'herd mentality', but I think there's a layer above that. People like order and hierarchy, and I'd accept that submission and belonging is a part of that, but it's the tool to a wider objective: order.

It would be an unbelievably dull world if we all looked to science for the answers, and an unachievable world as our experience tells us science certainly doesn't have all of the answers.

Like it or not, atheists do not have the one true path to salvation, nor does anybody else, and it's the arrogance of certainty in an uncertain world that causes consternation.

I would mention the left-wing types at this point, but Julie will be along within seconds to start a war with me (she has a bell that goes off when the words 'left-wing' are typed). Only pulling your leg Julie!

[c.d.]

Hello Tom,

First of all thanks for the compliment...well, sort of. I can't remember ever expressing anger towards God in any of my posts let alone rampant anger. Now I will admit to having a great dislike for people who spread evil in the world in the name of religion. And that is not limited to Christians (or more precisely to people who think they are practicing Christianity but who wouldn't know Christianity if it flew up their ass). All you have to do is look around the world and you will find all manner of evil being perpetrated in the name of religion. Does religion do good things? Absolutely. But I see no point in turning a blind eye to the bad that it also does.

You started this thread by bad mouthing atheists as though they were guilty of something simply by being atheists. I simply attempted to point out that atheists are not the ones behind so much of what is wrong with the world today. That is all I did.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

Brilliant post, Fleets.

I love c.d. He's one of my favorite posters. But he turns into Mr. Hyde when it comes to religion and his rampant anger towards God takes him over. But yes, atheists have a difficult time when they try to argue that all the world's faults are due to Christianity, because they're arguing a false premise. Clearly, greed was behind slavery and not any religion. And slavery of course existed long before Christ was born, so it's not a recent concept. In any event, we pay the price for slavery every day in America now and none of us alive were around to reap the benefits, so I suppose its true that the sins of the father are visited on the son!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fleetwood Mac]

"No group in the last two hundred years has done more for humanity than the Christians..."

Native Americans and black slaves during the Civil War might have a different take on that. Just saying.

c.d.

I could be wrong here but I think Britain was at the forefront of ending slavery. We, as a nation, certainly profited from slavery at the expense of people's liberty - no argument there from me, so it's a shallow victory in a sense.

But, the point is that many of those at the forefront of ending slavery and lobbying Parliament to send ships to Africa to prevent it from happening long after Britain had outlawed slavery, were Christians; practicing Christians at that.

As far as I can tell, the whole idea of race and a natural order among the various races, was invented by a Swede in the 1700s and up until this idea began to spread it wasn't unusual for British and French colonists to marry the natives. Much of the exploitation was economic rather than anything to do with Christianity, although there certainly were Christian missionaries who aimed to spread the word; which is imperialism of a kind.

But, no, it would be unkind to lay the blame at the door of Christianity per se, unless of course you are going to argue that these were Christian nations and by default merchants were Christians, but then that would be in direct contradiction to your post on the other thread which stated the US is not and never was a Christian nation. Can't have it both ways, surely.

[Roy Corduroy]

Its beginning to look a lot like Christmas -

The billboards go up

Casebook has its Athiest Coffee Klatch special Holiday edition

You can set your clock to it

Roy

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Tom

I think CD is himself American.

Yes, but Oklahoma is Indian territory.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott