Quote from Ash

Stop right there. You're only a paragraph in and I know this won't end well. I don't "Believe" in science the same way one "believes" in their religion. No atheist does. The word "belief" evokes "faith", which in turn is the exact opposite of what I have. One with faith holds on to their beliefs despite contradicting evidence. If I were to see that the scientific method was an ineffective way of finding truth, I would ditch it in a second. However, there has been no such case yet.

Sorry, what I was trying to say is that 'science' almost becomes an opposite to religion for some people. Rejecting religion is as if they've "accepted" science, or become a "part" of it, despite the fact that religious people can be scientists.

Obviously you don't know Einstein.

In that quote he wasn't talking about religion in a theological since: he was himself an atheist, or at least and agnostic. He meant religion as in a hypothetical "religion of science", a dogmatic approach towards science.

Einstein himself said, "I am not an atheist". He wasn't proposing a religion of science either, as he insisted that these are seperate yet connected.

This was his explanation:
"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited mind grasps the mysterious force that moves the constellations."

That's a very weak argument. It doesn't prove a thing about theism. You might as well have said "If it weren't for Coffee, many scientific discoveries may not have been made."

First, correlation does not imply causation. Just because theism came before any specific discovery doesn't mean that theism caused that discovery.

This was reference to Einstein's quote about the relationship of science and religion. He said it can be religion which prompts scientific investigation.

There is no correlation between religion and discovery in the sense that religion appeared and scientific discovery was made! As I said above, I was pointing out the fact that in some occasions it has been religion itself which has prompted scientific investigation.

And how dare you doubt the powerof coffee... 8O

In fact, usually those with theistic beliefs IMPEDE the advancement of science. One need look no further than Galileo, who was put on house arrest for his scientific propositions.

I agree, some strict religions which punish those who go against them have indeed hampered scientific progress!

Stop, you're making a fool of yourself. At the core of Hinduism is the belief in reincarnation. Hindu beliefs have no concept of a "new soul". If you are alive, then your soul has been borrowed by thousands of people before you, and presumably thousands after you, unless you reach enlightenment, because only then can you escape the endless cycle of reincarnation.

This presents a mathematical impossibility. Hindu beliefs maintain that every time a person is born, the soul of another person is taken (the carrier dies) and is put into the new person.
So what happens when the population rises to billions of people?

I think that someone's been printing up new souls!

What you say is just another example of how people misunderstand the concept of reincarnation in Buddhism and Hinduism. You are not necessarily reborn as a person, and secondly this lies on the premise of history being linear. History may be cyclical, in that generations come and go. We have heard of the Ice Age, the destruction of dinosaurs and what not. Reincarnation is not a simplistic concept at all.

Well, firstly, most atheists (SPELL IT RIGHT, YOU IDIOT!) don't have Christian weddings. They have "Civil marriages", usually in a courthouse, and with no religious connotations.

Secondly, most of the ones who still marry in a church only do so because churches are beautiful buildings, with amazing architecture and artwork.

Many DO get married in a temple, or on beaches. They get married where they want to.

Of course not all atheists get married in churches! However I've talked with many people who call themselves atheists but when asked, say they will marry in a church. For many atheists, this is going against what they believe in. Some people who get married elsewhere, still have a priest present! Its like a Muslim going to the Synagogue for prayer. Slightly contradictory? I respect those atheists who choose to not opt for a Christian wedding.

I do things like that all the time.

Does that mean anything? NO.
If I say "Holy cow" does that make me a Hindu? NO.

Good ****ing god you're an idiot.

Wow, you're a bit of a moron too. Which Hindu in his/her right mind exclaims "Holy cow". If you didn't know, that's a derogatory remark.

If you shout out Jesus, get married in a building dedicated to his teachings, celebrate his birth,and whatnot, do you expect people to think you're a Sikh? No beanhead. Thats like someone exclaiming Hail Hitler when they hurt their pinky, celebrating the killing of Jews in the holocaust on 27th January, yet saying they are against Hitler's beliefs.

Whether I was once a Christian has no bearing on whether I should be an atheist. The only reason I was ever a Christian was because I was forced into it through childhood indoctrination. People around me said it was so, and I believed it.

Thats the worst part about it. Of course people have a right to their beliefs, but some people believe they are totally seperated from religion altogether while western scoiety itself is ingrained with Christian beliefs which have been 'normalised'.

I AM offended. You are riding under the assumption that atheism is a person who is really a theist deep down, but for some reason denies the existence of god just for shits and giggles.

Atheism, by definition, means WITHOUT ANY BELIEF IN THE EXISTANCE OF A GOD.

I think that god doesn't exist. I'm not just saying that, either, I really feel that way. It may be hard for a simpleton like you to comprehend, but some people actually might have different beliefs then you.

Dam thats funny shit! :Happy:

Quote from herbivore

Sorry, what I was trying to say is that 'science' almost becomes an opposite to religion for some people. Rejecting religion is as if they've "accepted" science, or become a "part" of it, despite the fact that religious people can be scientists.

Einstein himself said, "I am not an atheist". He wasn't proposing a religion of science either, as he insisted that these are seperate yet connected.

This was his explanation:
"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited mind grasps the mysterious force that moves the constellations."

This was reference to Einstein's quote about the relationship of science and religion. He said it can be religion which prompts scientific investigation.

There is no correlation between religion and discovery in the sense that religion appeared and scientific discovery was made! As I said above, I was pointing out the fact that in some occasions it has been religion itself which has prompted scientific investigation.

Quote from Me

In fact, usually those with theistic beliefs IMPEDE the advancement of science. One need look no further than Galileo, who was put on house arrest for his scientific propositions.

What you say is just another example of how people misunderstand the concept of reincarnation in Buddhism and Hinduism. You are not necessarily reborn as a person, and secondly this lies on the premise of history being linear. History may be cyclical, in that generations come and go. We have heard of the Ice Age, the destruction of dinosaurs and what not. Reincarnation is not a simplistic concept at all.

Of course not all atheists get married in churches! However I've talked with many people who call themselves atheists but when asked, say they will marry in a church. For many atheists, this is going against what they believe in. Some people who get married elsewhere, still have a priest present! Its like a Muslim going to the Synagogue for prayer. Slightly contradictory? I respect those atheists who choose to not opt for a Christian wedding.

Wow, you're a bit of a moron too. Which Hindu in his/her right mind exclaims "Holy cow". If you didn't know, that's a derogatory remark.

If you shout out Jesus, get married in a building dedicated to his teachings, celebrate his birth,and whatnot, do you expect people to think you're a Sikh? No beanhead. Thats like someone exclaiming Hail Hitler when they hurt their pinky, celebrating the killing of Jews in the holocaust on 27th January, yet saying they are against Hitler's beliefs.

Thats the worst part about it. Of course people have a right to their beliefs, but some people believe they are totally seperated from religion altogether while western scoiety itself is ingrained with Christian beliefs which have been 'normalised'.

Quote from Ash

You are looking at it all wrong. I don't reject religion in the same way a vegetarian might reject meat and go with vegetables instead, choosing one over the other.

lol what? Of course you do, unless your just blank and don't think about the world. You choose to believe there is no god, and reject the existence of a god... even if you are born an atheist. If you're born to believe the Earth is round, you're rejecting that its flat. Both are mutually exclusive - you can't believe there is a god and there isn't.

If you cannot understand, I'll explain again: Science and religion are not opposites, because they do not necessarily contradict each other. I disagree with the idea the several atheists have that by rejecting religion, they have "accepted" science. Science is not something you accept. A religious person can be a scientist/agree with science too. Science can be part of religion, and science can investigate religion.

In short: I'm sick of stupid white dicks who think by becoming atheists they become intelligent all of a sudden. They know nothing about science yet because they've joined another movement like emos, they feel special.

And now you'll say calling atheism a movement is stupid. Be it so, I'm talking about the kids haven't given a second thought about what they believe in. BTW, I am not talking about anyone here/all atheists - only certain people who behave like that.

Humans are born atheists. We are no more theists at birth than one is a Republican or a Marxist at birth.
I picked up religion as one might pick up a piece of gum, chewed it for a while, and then spat it back out.

Being an atheist isn't something you add to my list of characteristics. It' sjsut that I don't have any religion on that list.

I love to chew on Wrigley's atheism gum and stick it on bus seats. Gum analogies don't help here, and yeah... back to the debate.

http://blogs.jta.org/telegraph/article/2008/06/18/1000044/relatively-speaking-einstein-was-an-atheist

You've found a shallow analysis of a such a debated topic as Einstein's spirituality. Maybe you should read it yourself, because Einstein was undoubtedly an agnostic. If you care, take a book out and read up on him. But I know you wont do that, and arguing this point is futile, as thats not what this debate is about.

Read below:

Sure, religion might prompt scientific discovery. The only cases of that are when people make an observation CONTRADICTING religion, and then try to explain that observation.

To say that any scientific discovery is made BECAUSE OF religion is a desperate attempt at finding something good that religion does for science. In almost all cases, the discovery is made IN SPITE OF religion, not BECAUSE OF.

Wow Mr. Scientist. I didn't know someone can understand all the scientific advancements at such a young age! Just because what you've learned so far in year 4 science seems to have been made in spite of religion, doesn't mean it is. Wait, does gravity disprove religion? Projectile motion? Radioactive decay? Science has nothing to do with this. If radical Christians go around burning professors for lols, I can't help that, but look to some tolerant religion which hasn't spent eternity swooping the land and converting people at gunpoint.

Its something some atheists would love to believe. Why? Because of that subconscious feeling that they are now some sort of advocate for science. Well, many religious people have been famous scientists.

I hate it when religious folly such as Christians against stem cell research prevents scientific progress. True. But sometimes investingating the foundations of some religions has led to interestung science.

Err... And? It still presents a mathematical impossibility, whether one is reincarnated as a person or an ant.

You can't understand, because you choose to conveniently ignore half the paragrah. Lets leave this behind, because its no longer relevant, and just stop going around shouting "mathematical impossibility".

How is getting married in a church a contradiction of their beliefs? Who says that they have to believe in the existence of god to have their wedding in a church? They just might want to get married in a pretty building. I don't have to believe in god to enter a church.

EXACTLY. It's a derogatory remark for a Hindu, but to anyone else it's just a word. (Or in this case, phrase)

If thats the case, then to some people atheists are white shit-for-brains who've had their jobs stolen by Jews and Hindus and would rather play counter-strike than go to church on Sundays. We're trying to analyse this from a universal perspective. If you want someone to debate the topic from the point of view of a white American who has woken up to realise god's just a convenient myth, let me know, but I don't intend to.

"Nigger" may just be a word for some people, but for many its derogatory. Because you don't find it offensive, doesn't mean next time you say it to the guy down the road you wont come home with a hole punched in your face.

You shout out Jesus Christ in pain, but the Muslim you live next to won't. If everything is ultimately subconscious and doesn't mean anything, then how can someone be distinguished from another? I infer someone is a Jew if they wear a Jewish cap, yet I am meant to understand someone shouting "for Christ's sake" and all its variations is an atheist?

Its become common language where you live, but you wont find Iraqis doing the same.

When I stub my toe and exclaim "Goddammit!" it's not because I literally want the Judeo-Christian god to send it to hell, it's because I grew up a Christian in America, and adopted the vernacular of those around me.

If I say "unicorn", does that mean I believe that unicorns exist? NO.

There was a boy in a class I had back when I was in school, and he would shout out "shit", "I'm a peacock" and whatnot. Was he a peacock? NO. He had tourettes.

Unicorn has no reference to a set of beliefs, but Jesus Christ, Hail Hitler, etc does. Just as if I went around shouting "Hail Hitler" in the neighbourhood, people would think I was a neo-nazi, someone shouting out the name of the Christian figure Jesus wouldn't be labelled a Hindu.

Undoubtedly, many Christian sayings/words have become part of they way people speak English. Like saying "Bless you" after someone sneezes is different/not there in other religions and languages. They're used all the time. However, many non-Christians who speak English do not like to exclaim "Jesus!" or "Hallelujah!" when something good happens.

My point again: If you don't believe in god, yet do so many things a Christian does, then there is Christianity ingrained in your conscience. Indeed you may believe there is no god from the heart. But to many, not just simpletons as you would have believe, you would appear otherwise.

It's not like that at ALL.

I celebrate a secular holiday based on the values of commercialized Christmas, with Santa, ornamented trees, and all that because I grew up in a Christian family. That's how it is for a LOT of atheists.

Just because I am celebrating a RELATED holiday doesn't mean that I am celebrating the birth of Jesus.

Many people who do NOT believe in Jesus, do NOT celebrate Christmas. These people have other religions. Atheists do not believe in Jesus, yet a LOT celebrate Christmas? This either a shame, or not true. You speak as if you are a representative for all atheists on this planet. Many atheists intentionally do not celebrate Christmas simply because they are after all celebrating the birth of Jesus. Search the net and you'll find it on many forums, etc.

Making the exscuse of a commercialised Christmas to justify what is possibly a fear of truly rejecting Christianity, is weak. If you want gifts, go give them to your freinds. But setting up a Christmas tree, Santa and other Christmas traditions and saying you're not a Christian is pathetic.

Just remember: you are not celebrating a related holiday. Christ-mass is what you are celebrating and that is a celebration of the birth of Christ.

Sure, no-one can stop you if you must do so, but it is like a vegetarian eating meat on an annual sausage sizzle. They're not vegetarians. Its bullshit. I read a blog about this somewhere, and he said it very well:

Not only must he(atheist) stand up to the theocrats, he must also stand up to himself. He must be honest with himself. He must not make excuses to himself. During the so-called holiday season, he must be able to stand aside and look at it all objectively and say, "Why, this is silliness. Gussied up though it may be in tinsel and fantasy, it's all no more than ritual kow-towing to an imaginary being in the sky. I'm a grownup now, and I no longer need to believe in Santa Claus."
If you're not able to do this, then at least, for God's sake, stop pretending you're an atheist.

And your scenario is NOT like my own at ALL. Perhaps you should modify it to include factors like "The holiday celebrated on January 27th, henceforth Naziday, has over the past century become more and more commercialized, and in the common eye focusing more on The Great Smiley and family values than Hitler, even though it is supposed to be about Hitler" and "It is generally common practice to say "Hail Hitler" when one hurt their pinky."

It may be common practice to shout "Jesus!" in a predominantly Christian country such as America, but not everywhere. Likewise, why is "Hail Hitler" not a common saying, besides the fact its downright stupid? No-one says it because of the Nazi connotations. Its the hate for Holocaust and the Nazis. Yet Atheists shouting Jesus is alright. Of course it is, because that what they do where you live.

So if Naziday had become commercialised, you would celebrate it? Then you have no self respect. Just because something is commercialised, I wouldn't celebrate it, because I don't believe in the concept our theoretical Naziday is founded on - the killing of Jews. I don't why its different for Christmas? It is founded on the birth of the Christian figure, Jesus.

Oh? Like what? What are these "Christian Beliefs" so ingrained in Western society?

I've just been through them and there's many more. But it doesn't help the debate. Step into another country which isn't predominantly Christian and you would notice. But who can bothered with the airfare for a forum debate. lol.



Could you PLEASE not use a "bolded quote" style of reply? It's very frustrating to replay to.

Woops. Next time. :)

Quote from MoD

Still, I'm turning agnostic on my deathbed, just in case.