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

[Errata]

It's probably worth pointing out a fairly fundamental difference between theists and atheists. Theists believe on an emotional level. Religion is something they feel. Atheists believe on a rational level. They function on proof and logic.

Which is not to say that Theists are illogical and Atheists are cold and unemotional. But someone who believes in god will not lose that believe when presented when evidence. They feel it. It's true. And Atheists do not abandon their beliefs because their emotions get involved on Cosmic issues.

There are emotional atheists. And they are not true atheists. And I know this because I was one. No god I ever heard of inflicts mental illness on children. Therefor what I thought I knew about god was a lie. I can't believe in a god who would do something like that. And a lot of people face this. Judaism as a whole faced this during the Holocaust. People who see horrors, or who have horrors inflicted upon them face this. People who experience devastating loss face this. They think god would not do such a thing, but it happened, which means god you believed in doesn't exist. God is a dick, therefor they don't believe.

And it took me awhile to see the inherent logical flaw in that belief. If I believe that god is a dick, that doesn't mean I don't believe in god. It means I don't believe in a god who isn't a dick. You cannot become an atheist because you are angry at god. You can't be angry at something that doesn't exist. For example I have never been angry at unicorns. So I was forced to conclude that if I was angry, then I believed in his existence. I didn't believe in his goodness or his mercy or his glory, but I believed he was out there somewhere... just being a complete *******. Later I thought about other reasons for his failure. Maybe he wasn't all powerful. Maybe he didn't care, maybe he didn't know. But that came later. So now I am left with an extremely uncomfortable relationship with god, and being an atheist would be preferable. But unless I can stop feeling one way or another about god, I can't be an atheist.

So I feel about god. I don't think about him. I don't use logic. I'm a theist. It may feel like some creepy dude is lurking in my peripheral vision, which is not the religious norm by any means, but I can't shake the idea that he's there. Not doing his job.

So I don't accept arguments from atheists who try to prove to me that god is not what they were told he was. Everybody doesn't believe in some kind of god. Christians certainly don't believe in Hindu gods for example. So you lost faith in the Christian god? That doesn't make you an atheist. It means you aren't a Christian. Tell me how no kind of god exists, and that I accept. Only logic can argue against any kind of divinity. But emotion can certainly provide the personal proof an atheist needs. Tell me you feel that nothing is out there, and I accept that. It's not proof, but it tells me where you are coming from. The emotional component is why we can never change each others minds. It's why we can't even change our own minds.

[caz]

What precisely have Christians done for "humanity" in the last 200 years? You state this like it's a fact. I would like to see some evidence thereof please.

And more specifically, as a Christian, what do you do, precisely to the benefit of mankind? Do you volunteer? Organize charities? How much of your day/week/month is spent doing for mankind and living the testament you claim you believe in?

Tom doesn't have time, Ally. He's apparently too busy having to watch the kind of porn that is being banned in the UK.

But I expect he's found a get-out clause in the bible, bless him.

There but for the grace of Tom goes God.

When horrible things happen to us in life (and nobody, but nobody, is immune) I blame the fact that nature is an uncaring, imperfect lottery and science doesn't yet have all the answers to come to our rescue. But scientific breakthroughs in general have made modern lives a million times more comfortable than the lives of our oldest ancestors. Who could say the same for their God? At least I don't have to find excuses for an all-powerful, all-knowing deity, who looks the other way while some people suffer far more, or die much younger than others.

I can see how someone's belief in God must help them through personal suffering, so in that way they are truly fortunate compared with atheists, who have to grit their teeth and seek all their relief in more practical ways. But it is only science that has the potential to prevent someone's suffering in the first place.

And science gave Tom his porn, not God - surely?

Love,

Caz
X

[Abby Normal]

Claiming that religion is bad is overgeneralizing and simple minded. Its like saying government, law enforcement, culture, science is bad. Religion is like anything else, it has good things about it and bad things about it.

The point is, if you are so inclined, is to embrace the good and try to get rid of the bad things about it.

lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater here.

[Ally]

When horrible things happen to us in life (and nobody, but nobody, is immune) I blame the fact that nature is an uncaring, imperfect lottery and science doesn't yet have all the answers to come to our rescue. But scientific breakthroughs in general have made modern lives a million times more comfortable than the lives of our oldest ancestors. Who could say the same for their God?

This. When I think of true benefit to humanity in the last 200 years, I think of people like Edison and Jonas Salk, people whose work had actual impact on the lives of everyone on the planet and they were definitely not Christians. Hell Bill Gates has had more direct benefit to mankind than Joel Osteen and he's an agnostic.

At least I don't have to find excuses for an all-powerful, all-knowing deity, who looks the other way while some people suffer far more, or die much younger than others.

This is my feeling as well. If I actually believed in a god, I'd despise him.

[Robert]

Hi Errata

I understand your position. I'm afraid there is no way out of it, from a religious point of view. By that I mean, if I, an agnostic, were to become convinced of the existence of a god, by purely logical reasoning, then that would be a new piece of knowledge which I could store in my brain along with "I had Rice Krispies for breakfast" and E=MCsquared and "Washington is the capital of America." But I would be even further from a religious life than I am now. Religion demands faith as a virtue, and no amount of reasoning can take its place. A theologian might construct a cunning system to reconcile all the contradictions, but that would not be a religious system, because it would be a precondition.

[Ally]

Claiming that religion is bad is overgeneralizing and simple minded. Its like saying government, law enforcement, culture, science is bad. Religion is like anything else, it has good things about it and bad things about it.

The point is, if you are so inclined, is to embrace the good and try to get rid of the bad things about it.

lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater here.

The problem is that by and large it is the religious who feel that they are required by their divine purpose to tell and enforce by law how the rest of us choose to live our life. They segregate people into "right" and "wrong" based not on actual measurable standards but on what a 2000 year old books claim is the basis for right and wrong and attempt to force others, those who do not agree with their morality, to adopt it and live by their rules.

Let's take abortion. If you are opposed to abortion, don't have one. But attempting to base laws on it on your religious mentality when my body and my morality disagrees with you is infringing on my rights. Nature by the fact that 1/5 of pregnancies end in natural abortions is not opposed to the termination of pregnancies when circumstances are not ideal.

Gay marriage. If you think being gay is wrong, don't have gay sex. But don't attempt to base the laws of the land on your opinion as to what is right and wrong in terms of sexuality. Nature allows for homosexuality in a vast amount of species, including our own, therefore you cannot claim it is unnatural.

And on and on. When it comes to moral issues of the day, it always seems like the religious are on the oppressive side of the aisle, whether it is slavery, civil rights, gay rights, women equality, what have you. And if that is their belief that is their belief. But they should not be attempting to legislate their beliefs onto those who do not agree with them.


And despite what people like Tom repeat by rote, America is not a Christian Nation. Our constitution specifically prohibited establishing a religious requirement for the holding of office or being in the political arena. Which if they were attempting to found a christian nation, they would surely have done. No one is required to bend their knee to the god of any group to be a congressperson, senator or President of these United states.

Which means if the only reason you can come up with to outlaw something is "the invisible guy in the sky" says so, that's not going to cut it.

We are not a nation founded on ANY one religion. And no one religion is going to take control.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Anyway, we've got tea and cricket. Sex is for animals.

That's illegal here in the U.S. except for a few states down South and Oklahoma where Tom lives...sheep country you know.

c.d.

Just googled: "American man finds solace in the comfort of a sheep", and it came up with a picture of Tom cuddling a prize Oklahomian (probably not a word), thoroughbred sheep. A bonny sheep, mind.

Think David Hume laid to the rest the idea that man is closer to God than animals, and what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Fleetwood Mac]

An unbelievably dull world if we looked to science for answers as opposed to just hunkering down in the dirt and not bothering to look for answers at all?

Here's the problem Ally: if they're not your answers then they can't possibly be relevant. Speaking of the lack of reasonable human beings round these parts.....

[Ally]

And you consider it reasonable to make a statement such as that with absolutely no justification whatsoever and based on absolutely nothing I ever said?

Many people find answers to living their lives that are not my answers. I have never claimed that their answers are inferior to mine. They are the right answers for those people. I merely object when they try to enforce their "answers" onto my own.

And you attempt to imply I am the one who is unreasonable here? You did not directly respond to a single thing I said, you insulted the entire group of people that I belong to by stating we fail to recognize the desire and need to dream and then you claim that * I * -- I!! -- fail to see the relevancy in any view but my own and that I am the unreasonable one?

It would be funny if you were actually capable of grasping the irony.

[Fleetwood Mac]

The problem is that by and large it is the religious who feel that they are required by their divine purpose to tell and enforce by law how the rest of us choose to live our life. They segregate people into "right" and "wrong"

You seem to do a lot of 'telling' Ally in a style what can only be described as confrontational without any trace of humour.

Speaking of 'segregating people into right and wrong', you have to be joking? Two minutes ago you were saying something about hunkering around in the dirt (whatever that means, do people lie around in the dirt in America? Out of sheer boredom I'll throw in that we call dirt 'clarts' in the North East of England which is derived from the Anglo-Saxon 'claert', fancy that eh)

[Fleetwood Mac]

[QUOTE=Ally;281863

you insulted the entire group of people that I belong to.

[/QUOTE]

Jesus Christ. I know you have a history of cults over there, but it's worse than I thought. I mean, you're not even in a cult, at least I assume you're not, physically, at this point in time; but yet you're talking like you're on some serious mind-bending drugs.

[Ally]

[QUOTE=Fleetwood Mac;281864]

You seem to do a lot of 'telling' Ally in a style what can only be described as confrontational without any trace of humour.

And you are a model of tact and politeness and non-judgmental conversation?

Speaking of 'segregating people into right and wrong', you have to be joking? Two minutes ago you were saying something about hunkering around in the dirt (whatever that means, do people lie around in the dirt in America?

Hunker down in the dirt means to sit on your butt and do nothing. A mentality of laziness and non-adventure. Which you seemed to be advocating by stating "don't look to science for answers" and stating you don't look to the sky for wonder but are content with your little piece of the earth.

[Ally]

Jesus Christ. I know you have a history of cults over there, but it's worse than I thought. I mean, you're not even in a cult, at least I assume you're not, physically, at this point in time; but yet you're talking like you're on some serious mind-bending drugs.

Ah yes. This must be an example of your reasoned, tactful, religious, non-confrontational ideology of inclusion at work.

[Fleetwood Mac]

And you are a model of tact and politeness and non-judgmental conversation?

Aye, Ally, compared with you I'm the heir to the throne of Gandhi and associated peace advocates.

Hunker down in the dirt means to sit on your butt and do nothing. A mentality of laziness and non-adventure. Which you seemed to be advocating by stating "don't look to science for answers" and stating you don't look to the sky for wonder but are content with your little piece of the earth.

And, you're misrepresenting what I actually said: "science doesn't have all of the answers", which is an entirely different proposition and one that would be supported by scientists.

And, you're clearly devoid of the capacity to grasp what I said, either that or you've cynically manipulated it: I'd go back to Sam's point that you should do it for yourself, rather than what other people expect you to do, except I don't necessarily agree that Christianity is 'herd mentality'.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Ah yes. This must be an example of your reasoned, tactful, religious, non-confrontational ideology of inclusion at work.

Well, speak with some sort of sense then instead of acting like a neurotic fart trying to get out of a milk bottle.