The joy of religion - part xxxxxxxxx

[shira]

We are told ad nauseam about how - without God, without religion - humankind wouldn't have morality. And as long as we atheists accept that "moral behavior" can include rape and murder, I guess we have no basis to disagree.

This point is brought home (yet again, as if we need so many reminders) by an incident from India.

It seems that a calf went missing in a village, and a man from the village was rumored (in the village temple - because of course that's where morality is disseminated) to have brought meat from the calf to his home, to feed his family. (Wow, pretty outrageous stuff.) Anyway, whether the rumor was true or not, a mob descended on the man's home and beat the man to death. One of the man's sons was also beaten, and is near death. The mob - inflamed with the spirit of moral righteousness - also attempted to molest the man's daughter (hey, when you know you're on the right side of God, almost anything you do is "moral;" that's one of the great things about religion).

Not that it actually matters, but I'm absolutely certain that if it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was not a speck of beef in the man's home, the members of the mob will surely turn themselves in and freely admit their guilt. They won't hem and haw and pretend it was anyone but themselves who did the righteous deeds. Because when God's morality is your guide, you just know what the right thing to do is.

 

[glenn1]

Cool story bro. Now go find a few examples of happy go-lucky atheists and the atrocities they commit, you should find plenty of examples from the USSR or North Korea. But that's OK because they're not being hypocritical and following the moral code of some deity, right?

 

[thraashman]

Cool story bro. Now go find a few examples of happy go-lucky atheists and the atrocities they commit, you should find plenty of examples from the USSR or North Korea. But that's OK because they're not being hypocritical and following the moral code of some deity, right?

Find me someone doing a horrific act in the name of atheism and I'll be pretty surprised. I still bet I can find more people killing in the name of any given religion than ever have in the name of atheism. Hell, Christianity has a lot to make up for after the Holocaust.

 

[shira]

Cool story bro. Now go find a few examples of happy go-lucky atheists and the atrocities they commit, you should find plenty of examples from the USSR or North Korea. But that's OK because they're not being hypocritical and following the moral code of some deity, right?

At least atheists can't fall back on fairy-god-mother justifications to justify their atrocities to themselves. Which makes it ever-so-slightly-more-difficult for them to look at themselves in the mirror if they do commit atrocities. Which may actually lead to them committing fewer atrocities, "per-atheist-capita."

 

[Jaskalas]

This point is brought home (yet again, as if we need so many reminders) by an incident from India.

A proper religion would preach against harming the man.
What would the Pope do?

The West attempted to evolve past that superstitious !@#$ centuries ago. We've not yet completed that journey ourselves... and some parts of the world haven't even begun.

All you're really telling us is that cultures, societies, and religions are not all equal. That some are quite worse than others.

 

[Genx87]

So stupid people killed somebody in the name of their ideology? What else is new? But lets attack all religion just in case and act like an unthinking mob.

 

[glenn1]

Find me someone doing a horrific act in the name of atheism and I'll be pretty surprised. I still bet I can find more people killing in the name of any given religion than ever have in the name of atheism. Hell, Christianity has a lot to make up for after the Holocaust.

Most don't specifically cite atheism and why would they? You could say Jeffrey Dahmer, who said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” He killed dismembered, cannibalized, and indulged in necrophilia with 17 victims.

 

[dphantom]

All you're really telling us is that cultures, societies, and religions are not all equal. That some are quite worse than others

Indeed so. Some are much worse.

One can say the entire purpose of our life is a journey towards a state of grace in God.

 

[Genx87]

Indeed so. Some are much worse.

One can say the entire purpose of our life is a journey towards a state of grace in God.

Each culture has its good and bad. I know we like to preach to the world our moral superiority while we topple govts ending in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

 

[realibrad]

Most don't specifically cite atheism and why would they? You could say Jeffrey Dahmer, who said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” He killed dismembered, cannibalized, and indulged in necrophilia with 17 victims.

The question is a bit flawed though. Did Dahmer do what he did because he also did not believe in Santa? For his justification to be atheism, it would then logically follow that not believing in anything would be justification for those actions. So, not believing in Santa, the Easter Bunny, Tom Brady not being a cheater ect. Anything he did not believe in would seem to then be a justification, and I bet you do not believe that.

So, why would his non-belief in God be a justification any more than his non belief in Santa?

 

[cliftonite]

Most don't specifically cite atheism and why would they? You could say Jeffrey Dahmer, who said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” He killed dismembered, cannibalized, and indulged in necrophilia with 17 victims.

So if Dhamer believed in god he wouldn't have done any of those things?

 

[glenn1]

The question is a bit flawed though. Did Dahmer do what he did because he also did not believe in Santa? For his justification to be atheism, it would then logically follow that not believing in anything would be justification for those actions. So, not believing in Santa, the Easter Bunny, Tom Brady not being a cheater ect. Anything he did not believe in would seem to then be a justification, and I bet you do not believe that.

So, why would his non-belief in God be a justification any more than his non belief in Santa?

Agreed but I tried to answer the question. Disbelief in something isn't generally a motivating factor that people cite. You don't hear stories about terrorists going around saying "Atheism Akbar!" or "Atheism Save the Queen." Much more likely that your atheism was incidental to what actually drove the atrocity - e.g. not so much that you were an atheist but rather that you hated Musims for example.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Most don't specifically cite atheism and why would they? You could say Jeffrey Dahmer, who said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” He killed dismembered, cannibalized, and indulged in necrophilia with 17 victims.

I'm sure he did those things because he didn't have religion or God...

 

[realibrad]

Agreed but I tried to answer the question. Disbelief in something isn't generally a motivating factor that people cite. You don't hear stories about terrorists going around saying "Atheism Akbar!" or "Atheism Save the Queen." Much more likely that your atheism was incidental to what actually drove the atrocity - e.g. not so much that you were an atheist but rather that you hated Musims for example.

I will take a hard line stance and say disbelief is never a motivating factor. The motive will ways be a desire of something, not a lack of belief.

If I want to rob a bank, the reason I do is for the money, or thrill, fame ect. Its never because I don't fear getting caught. The belief I might get caught could be a limiting factor, but never a motivating factor.

The same goes with religion. Not having one does not drive you to do anything, it simply means you are not constrained by said religion's rules or traditions. Thus, Mao and Stalin did not do what they did because of atheism. They did what they did for power, or a million other reasons. The best argument that could be made would be that religion did not constrain them. The counter to that would be that before them, leaders did the same things. The only reason Mao or Stalin stand out is because they are more modern and had an ability to do more harm.

But, the main point is that atheism can never be attributed to a motivation.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

This isn't so much about religion as it is about the nature of men. But religion does make for an exceptionally effective scapegoat for the self-righteous among us...those who love to publicly rationalize their bigotry while flaunting their moral and intellectual superiority.

 

[realibrad]

This isn't so much about religion as it is about the nature of men. But religion does make for an exceptionally effective scapegoat for the self-righteous among us...those who love to publicly rationalize their bigotry while flaunting their moral and intellectual superiority.

I almost never do this, but that is something that atheism and religion have in common. Atheist very often feel superior to believers because they know the truth. I have met atheist who claim atheism because only stupid people believe in a god{s}. That might be true, but when you question why they do not believe in a god, their answers illogical. For those people, atheism is about feeling smarter than others.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I almost never do this, but that is something that atheism and religion have in common. Atheist very often feel superior to believers because they know the truth. I have met atheist who claim atheism because only stupid people believe in a god{s}. That might be true, but when you question why they do not believe in a god, their answers illogical. For those people, atheism is about feeling smarter than others.

Agree. It seems to me that these "zealots" of just about any ideology (religious, political or otherwise) are all about feeling morally/intellectually superior to others. They apparently don't understand how their ego is their undoing and, sadly, likely never will. I realize that there is much irony here in me saying this...as I am no better. But, there it is.

 

[realibrad]

Agree. It seems to me that these "zealots" of just about any ideology (religious or otherwise) are all about feeling morally/intellectually superior to others. They apparently don't understand how their ego is their undoing and, sadly, likely never will. I realize that there is much irony here in me saying this...as I am no better. But, there it is.

There is a difference between knowing you are smarter than others, and believing that without evidence. I think as long as you have evidence there is nothing wrong with thinking you are smart. The issue comes when you dismiss arguments that are not yours. I think I am smarter than many, and I think I often make well reasoned points, but, I still listen to arguments. I think once you stop listening to arguments, you cross the line.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

There is a difference between knowing you are smarter than others, and believing that without evidence. I think as long as you have evidence there is nothing wrong with thinking you are smart. The issue comes when you dismiss arguments that are not yours. I think I am smarter than many, and I think I often make well reasoned points, but, I still listen to arguments. I think once you stop listening to arguments, you cross the line.

The line between actually knowing and not knowing is blurry as hell and human beings are notorious for their ability to rationalize...and, as such, we are all highly susceptible to the possibility of self deception. Perceiving you're smarter than another is one thing...but placing personal "worth" in thinking one is smarter than other is quite another in my opinion.

 

[justoh]

They say that Hitler stopped eating meat in 1938. Coincidence? How many millions died because of vegetarianism?

 

[HomerJS]

I have yet to see anyone commit some horrific act based on their Atheism

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I have yet to see anyone commit some horrific act based on their Atheism

Yep, this place is still stupid. Prove me wrong. (See what I did there)?

 

[Retro Rob]

At least atheists can't fall back on fairy-god-mother justifications to justify their atrocities to themselves.

What difference does it make?

Is it more comforting for atheists to admit other atheists murdered for NO reason?

 

[realibrad]

Yep, this place is still stupid. Prove me wrong. (See what I did there)?

Don't need to, because your statement can be invalidated before it gets to right or wrong.

You have made a claim without evidence. You have made a factual statement, not just an opinion, which requires evidence. Until such time you provide evidence, your statement of fact can simply be dismissed.

 

[realibrad]

What difference does it make?

Is it more comforting for atheists to admit other atheists murdered for NO reason?

What makes you think they murdered without a reason? If I know the reason, I would feel better off at avoiding situations vs not knowing anything about the reasoning. People do not act without reason. That reason could be based off of a belief, or a compulsion. Atheism is not part of either of those things. There is no comfort as far as I can tell from an atheist killing someone vs a theist outside of being able to eliminate 1 variable.

When we better understand motivations, we are better able to prepare and or prevent. So when religion is taken out of the equation, it gets us closer to understanding.