Posts
Comments
"And I still don't see why "atheism" and "religion" are the relevant terms, as if atheism were itself an ideology. Marxism, liberalism, fascism, platonism -- and for that matter, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Animism, the Moonies, the Scientologists -- differ in more important ways than the formal belief or nonbelief in a deity."
My original point was that religious people follow the teachings of their religion regarding morality.
Atheists simply adopt the teachings of the surrounding culture, since that's the most comfortable thing to do. However when atheists themselves are in control of society, there are no moral rules at all and mass murder follows.
Atheism is not a religion, but its an attitude which tends to include cultural moral relativism, hedonism and narcissism.
No library in my area has Lolita and Netflix won't even send me the film. http://www.netflix.com/Movie/Lolita/709389?trkid=189530&strkid=1144472631_0_0
"Would you agree with me that many other, religious ideological governments share many problems with militantly atheistic ones?"
Actually, it would be hard to beat Pol Pot's Cambodia and present day North Korea.
Eliezer, most societies are intolerant of debate on certain taboo topics. Have you ever tried to find a copy of "Lolita" by Nabokov in a public library? Can I sell copies of Mein Kampf in Germany? And as far as evidence of God, I think it's quite good. Check my blog for details.
Tom, call me for your next barbeque. And DaCracka, just stay away from my slaves.
"The problem comes in only when atheists are themselves in control of society. Then they naturally kill and steal at will"
I mean societies where the government has officially endorsed and encouraged atheism.
Are religious societies better? Cannibals and Satanists, perhaps not, but it's a tough call. Orthodox Jews, Quakers, Mennonites, probably yes.
Based upon my observations, atheists simply imitate whatever morality the society around them is preaching. Darwin and Freud were perfect Victorians. It's most comfortable and profitable to go with the flow.
The problem comes in only when atheists are themselves in control of society. Then they naturally kill and steal at will, as we have seen in the case of every atheistic government so far in history. In that situation, mass murder and theft are most profitable.
If the watchmaker analogy is false then why don't we ever find a watch without a maker? In other words, why is there no example of a machine, with many parts working together efficiently for a specific purpose, which we have witnessed being created spontaneously? This leads me to assume that each organelle in every living cell had to have an intelligent designer.
"You and I both know that it would take us five minutes to produce a book that offers a more coherent and compassionate morality than the Bible does."
Like for example, the American legal system which legalizes the killing of unborn children. And I won't even mention the war of aggression in Iraq.
g, I would also like to point out that the fact that you previously embraced Christianity and currently believe in evolution with equal enthusiasm does not demonstrate that you are a foolish dupe. I would merely say that it's a possibility one should consider when debating with you.
g, I am merely suggesting that we take everything with a grain of salt. I'm sorry if you have a problem with that. Perhaps you are accepting atheism as uncritically as you previously accepted Christianity.
Doug, I hope I'm not exceeding too much my comment quota. But why be so pessimistic? The Talmud states "A wise person is someone who learns from everyone." Even if we do not reach complete agreement, we make pick up a few good ideas from each other.
I am looking forward to reading any comments, however many, which anyone may wish to leave on my blog. I am sure I will find them interesting.
Ah, very Latin of you. Is argumentum ad logicam something like argumentum ad webicam?
I guess we should just accept Darwinism and abandon monotheism because scientists say so. That appeal to authority is SO convincing. I can't imagine why it hasn't occurred to me?
I suppose 300 years ago, when every professor at Oxford would have told me that Jesus Christ was my Lord and Savior, I would have been a fool for denying that as well.
Quantum mechanics has posed a very serious challenge to determinism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism#Determinism.2C_quantum_mechanics_and_classical_physics
However, I would not expect someone as deeply in denial of reality as an atheist to be able to admit that.
Savagehenry, I would happy to hear you enlighten with your thoughts. If you indeed have any.
I wonder if atheists ever get a chance to think about the weakest points of their beliefs? http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2007/08/why-atheism-is-not-religion.html
Let anyone who thinks I am mistaken take the trouble to explain why. Unless they cannot.
My blog happens to be absolutely packed with rational proof of Orthodox Judaism and proof against atheism.