(David Dalle) wrote in message news:<b9446842.0408300449.504793da@posting.google.com>...
"Raan" <RaanOne@One.org> wrote in message news:<eqyYc.5992$7i2.263032@news20.bellglobal.com>...
"AC" <mightymartianca@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2pes4oFkdmdcU1@uni-berlin.de...
Raan wrote:
"AC" <mightymartianca@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:2pedu1Fjo0cjU1@uni-berlin.de...
Nick Keighley wrote:
"Raan" <RaanOne@One.org> wrote in message news:<PdhYc.7$7i2.6012@news20.bellglobal.com>...
"Nick Keighley" <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:aed14a74.0408281538.2cf45017@posting.google.com...
"Raan" <RaanOne@One.org> wrote in message news:<es6Xc.22207$DG.1053869@news20.bellglobal.com>...
Never before have our challenges been so great. Never
has your support been so important.
Secular humanism offers an alternative to dogmatism.
the trouble is, posts like yours lead us to believe that
"secular humanism" *is* dogmatism.
<snip suspisious rant>
How do you figure that and why do I need to ask this since you could
just as
well have explained yourself.
I suspect since you have to ask that you won't agree. Your original
post
sounds like preaching. You even ask for money at the end!
You try to conflate "science and reason" with "secularism and
humanism".
I find the statement "Much of the progress of the twentieth
century can be directly attributed to the rise of secularism
and humanism" contentious.
I'd say a growing secularism has had a lot to do with increasing
tolerance. As to the humanism claim, well, frankly, I don't think it's
even a blip on the radar.
One must note that this individual, like his theistic counterparts of
similar mood, appears to equate secularism with atheism. There are
plenty of people of faith who are secularists, because they know it's
the only way to preserve religious liberties for all (themselves
included).
For myself, I have no time for secular humanist clubs, even if they give
out neat beanies. My primary interest is simply to have people worry a
lot less about what their fellow humans believe or don't believe.
I'm left wondering if you had religious upbringing.
My suspicion also.
My post was clearly a quotation of a letter written by another.
Then that observation sits with him, though judging by the rest of your
post, it would seem that you have similar leanings yourself. Were you
always a secular humanist?
The equal rights of individuals and the ideal of reason and rationality
based on this real world we all live in, have both been of such far
reaching
influence that the powers and freedoms we enjoy today as common
individuals
in most of this free society, surpass even that of kings as little as
two centuries ago.
I know theists who have no problems whatsoever with freedoms. At least
some great reformers, like Gladstone, seem to have been driven by their
religious beliefs. Perhaps the world isn't quite so black and white as
either side would like to claim.
There is nothing dogmatic or religious about these facts
much as you might want to think so.
It is attempt to seize secularism and fashion it as an atheistic
creation which I find disturbing. As an atheist, I know full well that
secularism isn't reserved merely for the a-religious, but is a concept
that is shared by many religious people as well. A number of the
framers of such wonderous secular documents as the US Constitution were
deists, and yet they seemed to have a pretty damn good handle on
secularism.
The only faith that secular humanism
requires is the faith in one's own reason such as we have faith in our
ability to walk. Yet so many stumble and trip and fall repeatedly and
then claim it was God's will or blame the enemy lol.
I have no reason to slur the religious, and I'm afraid your slurs and
oversimplifications and generalizations rather indicate that you share
that intolerance that some theists do.
Get over it, pal. The world's a big place, and pissing on the other
parade isn't going to make it better. You're part of the problem, not
part of the solution. Right-minded people, theistic or atheistic,
should not desire to mock the other man's point of view, but rather
accept his right to have his faith or lack of faith, so that everyone
can wake up in the morning, pray or not pray, go to work, be productive
members of society, go home, go to church or not go to church, so that
they can wake up the next morning and do it all over again. Show a
little respect.
This sort of idiotic humanist evangelism is as pathetic and
disrespectful and theistic evangelism. If I had the power to choose, I
wouldn't mind seeing all the evangelists of all stripes carted off to
some far off island and leave the rest of humanity to get on with
things. You guys pick fights and then automatically assume those folks
you count on your side of the field are going to follow your rallying cry.
Well, you won't get me, atheistic secularist that I am. I'm in the camp
of everyone believing what they want and letting the other guy believe
what they want.
My view is that belief is not even to be tolerated let alone respected but
to be reviled and avoided as with an illness, and those so afflicted pitied
and if possible, treated. Belief is the root cause of all suffering. Look
into it.
[R]"belief is... to be reviled and avoided as with an illness"
Religious viruses of the mind are indeed [R]"to be reviled and avoided
as with an illness."
[R]"belief... those so afflicted pitied and if possible, treated."
Those individuals afflicted with religious viruses of the mind should
be treated if possible, but at a minimum, carriers of viruses of the
mind should be quarantined/ imprisoned.
1997 Nicholas Humphrey
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0406081943.625bd70c%40posting.google.com
Andrew Brown's comments on Humphrey
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0406131334.2de61508%40posting.google.com
Dennett: Baptists ought to be put in cages
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=6hihi0pd6bbh9minslv76qrvmrpr3aea7m%404ax.com
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0406241903.4c152fe7%40posting.google.com
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407101059.ab87e1f%40posting.google.com
The *best* way to prevent further spread of viruses of the mind is
through execution of the persons afflicted. A dead IDiot is an
uninfectious IDiot.
[R]"My view is that belief is not even to be tolerated"
You misspoke: your *belief* [R]"is that belief is not even to be
tolerated."
[R]"Belief is the root cause of all suffering." So it's your belief
that [R]"Belief is the root cause of all suffering." I believe you
are correct on this point.
AH YES! I HEAR THE CLARION CALL! A GLORIOUS CRUSADE TO RID THE WORLD
OF ALL BELIEF! WE WILL PUT ALL BELIEVERS TO THE SWORD!
If we can we should. Marx put it well:
Man is subject to the same laws as nature; might and
freedom are identical.
AN OCEAN OF
BLOOD WILL CLEANSE THIS EARTH OF THAT GREAT EVIL, RELIGION!
The True Scientific Truth religion using the sword to cleanse the
earth of competing false religions sounds marvelous.
THIS
FINAL BATTLE WILL USHER IN A GOLDEN AGE, A PARADISE WHERE SUFFERING IS
DEAD!
The Soviet Union with its atheocracy was just such a Paradise, a
"heaven" on earth. Unfortunately the Golden Age ended there, but it
is still going strong in North Korea and China.
A PERFECT SOCIETY OF PURE UNBELIEVERS RULED BY THE WISDOM OF MY
SECULAR HUMANIST CLUB!
A society consisting of *only* atheists and *no* IDiots is *highly*
desirable. As Marx observed,
Pierre Bayle not only prepared the reception of
materialism and the philosophy of common sense in
France by shattering metaphysics with his skepticism.
He heralded atheistic society, which was soon to
come to existence, by proving that a society consisting
only of atheists is possible, that an atheist can be a
respectable man, and that it is not by atheism but by
superstition and idolatry that man debases himself.
The Marx quotations came from
Marx, Karl. _The Essential Marx: The Non-Economic
Writings-- A Selection_, edited, with new translations, by
Saul K. Padover (New York: New American Library,
1978), 438pp., 300-301, which in turn came from Marx's
_The Holy Family_, with Engels (1845, Moscow 1956),
167-177.
(for those lacking a brain, I applied a touch of sarcasm to the above)
Yahya and Koster on the use of fear and force
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407030811.4e8cd1bd%40posting.google.com
.
