| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Chas" |
| Date: |
09 Sep 2003 03:55:38 PM |
| Object: |
A Different Take |
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god. It is as likely one can prove the existence of a god as her
non-existence. Nonetheless there is no shortage of folks who are still at it
after hundreds of years.
As one who counts himself an atheist I think it's a waste of time and effort
to attempt to prove that which is unprovable. Besides, if tomorrow it were
conclusively demonstrated there was no god, does anyone really believe all
the clerics would quit, religious building would be converted to restaurants
and little theaters, and believers would buy rabbit's feet and four leaf
clovers ?
For me, increasingly, it's more interesting to ask the question: What has
religion done for us ? The usual response is, look what a louse mankind is,
think how much worse he would be without religion. How much worse would he
be ? How bad are things in Netherlands ? In Sweden ? Denmark ? The morality
of a people bares no apparent correlation with their belief in a god.
Is there another industrialized country in the world where the belief in a
god and attendance in some religious institution is greater than in the
United States, and how do we compare in our crime rates, particularly
murder; our incarceration rates, numbers of abortion or drug addicts ? If
belief in a god is so important in living "a good life," how does it
evidence itself ?
How much does religion cost ? In the United States most church property is
exempt from taxes. What would the tax rate in most of cities be if such
property were taxed as the ordinary taxpayer is taxed ? It will be argued
that the charitable activities of the churches more than pay for themselves
? Do they ? Where is the evidence of it. If religious property were taxed,
how much charity could that income buy ?
To what extent is religious charity little more than extortion ? If the
homeless want a place to sleep or an evening meal, do they get it without
having to listen to some religious person try to sell them their beliefs.
And, by the way, where can it be shown that starting and ending each day
with a prayer makes any difference in one's life ? I attended high school
when each day was started with The Pledge and each assembly with a prayer.
Some graduates supported the war in Viet Nam and even enlisted; others
opposed the war and demonstrated, even burning their draft cards.
More fundamental, so far as I'm concerned, is what god has to say. Well, god
doesn't say anything, she just has spokespersons. And what they have to say
is their idea of what their scripture says. When I hear Falwell and his type
tell me what god wants, I don't hear god, I hear Falwell. Might not atheists
be more successful if, instead of worrying about the existence of a god,
they questioned those who claim they speak for god ? Isn't there some point
at which the claims of revelation of these self-anointed ministers can be
questioned ?
Some time ago I suggested that atheists are too ambitious. They should start
with something easier. Prove there is no Easter Bunny. Once successful in
that, move on to the proof there is no Santa Claus. Then move on to proving
angels and devils don't exist. After that, prove there is no god. Atheists
should walk before they run.
Now my request is for something even more modest: demonstrate that religion
is, for the most part, irrelevant and expensive.
.
|
|
| User: "Jesus Christ" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 09:43:05 PM |
|
|
"Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net> :
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there
is no god.
Prove? No, that's already the conclusion as there *is* no proof. You're
the one with the onus on you here.
--
___ _ ___ , , __ _ ______
/\ / (_) ()(_| | () / (_)/| |/|/ \ | | ()(_) |
| | \__ /\ | | /\ | |___| |___/ | | /\ |
| | / / \ | | / \ | | |\| \ _ |/ / \ _ |
\_|/\___//(__/ \__/\_//(__/ \___/ | |/| \_/\_/\//(__/(_/
/| FALSE CHRISTIANS (failed the Luke 6:30 test):
\| Pastor Frank Ontheway
M. Clark Duke32
CaptainKIRKusa1
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D3" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 04:21:27 PM |
|
|
"Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net> said:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god.
Why? How long does it take you?
Jim07D3
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 07:59:46 PM |
|
|
"Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net> thought hard and said:
Besides, if tomorrow it were
conclusively demonstrated there was no god, does anyone really believe all
the clerics would quit, religious building would be converted to restaurants
and little theaters, and believers would buy rabbit's feet and four leaf
clovers ?
Nope. You see, the proof of no god is TEH DEVILS WORK.
--
-Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, and Gustav Mahler are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cyberia" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 06:23:29 PM |
|
|
Chas wrote:
For me, increasingly, it's more interesting to ask the question: What
has religion done for us ?
It turned several large passenger conveyances into incredibly effective
missiles that killed thousands on September 11th, 2001. Don't you remember?
It makes men in the middle east strap explosives on their backs and walk
into a crowded public area - where there's sure to be lots of folks of that
OTHER religion - and blow themselves and everybody else into oblivion.
God works in mysterious ways.
--
---------------
SeeYa !
--------------
Hello....... Is this thing on ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 04:45:09 PM |
|
|
Chas wrote:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god.
Meanwhile, theists can't be bothered to support their claims that there *is* a
god.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
Is your faith so weak and your god so powerless
that, without government endorsement of your
religion, all hell will break loose?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "GlennGlenn" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
10 Sep 2003 03:06:24 AM |
|
|
In article <d7r7b.229$%65.143@news.randori.com>, Chas
<chas@net.bluemoon.net> wrote:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god.
From: Wordsmith <wsmith@wordsmith.org>
Date: Tue Sep 9, 2003 9:02:41 PM US/Pacific
To:
Subject: A.Word.A.Day--ipse dixit
ipse dixit (IP-see DIK-sit) noun
An assertion without supporting proof.
[From Latin, literally, he himself said it.]
The term ipse dixit is the Latin equivalent of the Greek autos epha,
referring to Pythagoras, as in, The master (Pythagoras) said it so it
must
be true and no proof is needed. In our modern world, this has many
forms:
Child: Why do I have to go to bed at eight every day?
Parent: Because I said it.
Employee: Why do we have to do this project if it's going to be
scrapped anyway?
Boss: Because I said it.
-Anu
"The state had relied so heavily upon the ipse dixit that `it is a
nuisance
because I say it is,' the Supreme Court could not as a matter of law
say
whether a nuisance in fact existed."
A Two-Front Battle For Property Rights; Christian Science Monitor
(Boston,
Massachusetts); Sep 18, 1992.
"Nor was it what the framers of the Indiana Constitution intended.
Even
though the state held a constitutional convention in 1850-51 to
repair
what even back then was a sargassum sea of ipse dixits, nobody paid
any
attention."
Ruth Holladay; Ruth Holladay Column; The Indianapolis Star
(Indiana);
Jul 29, 2003.
This week's theme: terms from Latin.
Sponsors' Messages:
Earn $5 to $25 for answering online surveys. Surveys are offered
globally
and in many languages. Membership is Free. Join Now.
http://www.a2.acop.com
And
Try an awesome stress reliever: Crazy Aaron's Thinking Putty!
In adult-sized handfuls and amazing colors, http://puttyworld.com
..........................................................................
....
The greatest minds are capable of the greatest vices as well as of the
greatest virtues. -Rene Descartes, philosopher and mathematician
(1596-1650)
Q: Tomorrow is my friend's birthday and I forgot to send her a gift.
Help!
A: How about the gift of words?
A Word A Day, subscription: http://wordsmith.org/awad/gift.html
A Word A Day, the book:
http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0471230324/ws00-20
Pronunciation:
http://wordsmith.org/words/ipse_dixit.wav
http://wordsmith.org/words/ipse_dixit.ram
--
--GlennGlenn--aa#825--
--dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com--
--Lost & seeing double somewhere in Hollywood, CA--
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 04:05:27 PM |
|
|
On 09 Sep 2003, "Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:d7r7b.229$%65.143@news.randori.com:
Isn't this the third time you've posted this in a new thread? Do you think
perhaps we didn't hear you the first two times?
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly realized
I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
10 Sep 2003 05:48:01 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 18:44:08 GMT, "Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net>
wrote:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god.
In all the time I have been in alt.atheism I can only remember 1
person who claimed to be able to prove that - and nearly everyone
else rejected the offered proof.
[Long snip - I agree with much of what you say]
Some time ago I suggested that atheists are too ambitious. They should start
with something easier. Prove there is no Easter Bunny.
Can't help you there. Here in the UK there is such a profound
absence of Easter Bunnies that I am not even sure what an 'Easter
Bunny' is. I had never even heard of the poor animal till I
joined usenet.
Can anyone tell me who or what the Easter Bunny is?
Once successful in that, move on to the proof there is no Santa Claus.
Why prove it? The belief in Santa is designed so that it
collapses after a few years. The few children who continue to
believe have to be told the truth - but that is best not done too
soon.
Some friends of mine told their son that there was no Santa Claus
and he refused to believe them. He is, by the way, very
intelligent. They told him that the spirit of generosity that
Santa represents is very real. I guess he sorted all that out
himself.
But proof of non existence? Why clutter up the head with such
nonsense?
Then move on to proving angels and devils don't exist.
Demons certainly exist. That anger that has not been expressed
will wait it's time and erupt. The sadness that has not been felt
will poison the whole being.
I don't know what idiot first claimed that demons were
supernatural, but I am pretty sure that the origin of the idea
lies in repressed feelings. If they are felt then the
superstitious ideas tend to dissolve away.
After that, prove there is no god.
There is no what?
Atheists should walk before they run.
Now my request is for something even more modest: demonstrate that religion
is, for the most part, irrelevant and expensive.
A little gentle encouragement to those starting to break free is
very worthwhile.
-
Martin Thomas
mart666t@netscape.NO.HAWKERS.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MarkA" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 05:05:05 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:55:38 +0000, Chas wrote:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is
no god. It is as likely one can prove the existence of a god as her
non-existence. Nonetheless there is no shortage of folks who are still at
it after hundreds of years.
Nobody can even begin to prove there is no god until some theist is
willing to provide a testable definition of god. That day is not likely
to arrive anytime soon.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Richardson" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
09 Sep 2003 08:48:10 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:55:38 GMT, "Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net>
wrote:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god.
I spend exactly zero time trying to prove there is no god.
I can't possibly spend any less time than "none at all".
8-)
As one who counts himself an atheist I think it's a waste of time and effort
to attempt to prove that which is unprovable.
Get in line and take a number.
The vast majority of atheists already know this.
For me, increasingly, it's more interesting to ask the question: What has
religion done for us ?
The aqueducts?
(sorry - just being silly)
Some time ago I suggested that atheists are too ambitious. They should start
with something easier. Prove there is no Easter Bunny.
Being an atheist is nothing to do with "proof".
I mean absolutely NOTHING.
Zip, zero, nada.
(Not being silly - absolutely 100% serious)
Now my request is for something even more modest: demonstrate that religion
is, for the most part, irrelevant and expensive.
Figure it out for yourself - it is always much better than having
someone else do it for you.
(Not being silly - absolutely 100% serious)
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "D Wolf" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
10 Sep 2003 06:55:12 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:55:38 GMT, "Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net>
wrote:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god.
Wow, blew it the first paragraph.
Who has to prove there is no god? Its up to the Christians ect, to
prove there IS one. The proof of a thing is up to its claimant.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: A Different Take |
10 Sep 2003 07:12:39 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 06:55:12 -0500, D Wolf <no-email@adress.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:55:38 GMT, "Chas" <chas@net.bluemoon.net>
wrote:
It seems to me that atheists spend too much time trying to prove there is no
god.
Wow, blew it the first paragraph.
Who has to prove there is no god? Its up to the Christians ect, to
prove there IS one. The proof of a thing is up to its claimant.
You have to understand that these gullible idiots have a strange
definition for atheists, which includes "imagine they can disprove
God", "zeal to disprove God", etc - where "God" is "something that
all reasonable people know exists, because it's so obvious". So even
though we don't, their mind sees that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
