I was looking up news coverage on atheism in America and found that they were widely misunderstood, 'hated,' and often debated against with false historical references as main points. I was wondering what the overall consensus was in the forums on atheism. I do not believe people know exactly what it is or understand why atheism is having a sort of movement in America.

Here's a link to a CNN talk on atheists by three people---none of whom are atheists fyi. Most of the worst stuff is from Fox News though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3ug8jV0xCg...feature=related

Atheists are widely accepted in my country and many asian states (except maybe the muslim states like Msia or Indonesia), but fundamentalist countries like some islamic states in the gulf, and some african states would find atheism abhorrent...

I happen to think that America became increasingly fundamentalist in the last administration of GWB.. and that's how Atheists came to be seen as a movement threatening to the christian right.

Hopefully this will change in the new administration...

I would submit, that one wouldn't hear the actual truth from CNN.
I have listened to them off and on through the years.
It's as though one is stepping into a liberal university's radio program.
They make no excuses, for the way in which they are reporting.
They present their selected topics, through the narrow spectrum of their bias.

I have to turn them off, and get the real news, from the real world, not through their dreaming, fogged in, incapsulated spunned thoughts, that simply aren't based in factual reality.

The BBC, is ok at times, and then the views of Austrailia, as well as other news sources, they are interesting at times, as well as some of Fox news.

FYI another thought from Socrates


[b]Socrates: A Heathen Perspective.[/b]

[b]“suicide was regarded as the highest form of bravery,... commended and celebrated as men of noble minds.” [/b]

Wow those 2 ladies kinda pissed me off with their arguments. closed minded and BS coming out the @$$ of the last statement about Europe. How does one come to such conclusions?

I am not a religious person but I am a believer. I have this Atheist officemate who always annoys me and pisses me off that he keeps saying that there is not God, Abortion is ok and enjoy life while you can. Sometimes the Atheists are the ones annoying the believers.

I have a Buddhist and many Muslim officemates and we don't annoy each other.

In America there is freedom of religion but the majority population of America is still Christianity so they are still very influencial Politically in America.

If you go to Saudi Arabia, majority are Muslims and they don't allow the practice of Christianity because of the Sharia Laws and Christians there are discriminated.

My experience has been, all, 100 percent of Atheists made a choice about God.

Now, they are simply on a rebound from a bad experience, and if they can, they'll be the center of attention.

The anti God stand is just a mask, a mask of the inward pain, that, thus for, they are unable to deal with it.

They have been wounded emotionally in the past.

If they will be honest with one, you would fine exactly when it happened, and the final steps, to the place, that they, in their supressed anger towards God, make their Anti God profession.

It will be God's love, that in fact, will reach them.

They denied the "One" they don't know, yet, it is this "One," that knows them.

And, here I though atheism was just the result of looking at the world without faith in God.
H mmm, seems like there are many reasons why one may decide to go to other faiths
and also many reasons why some just choose to believe God plays no role in their lives

Someone said, "seek and you shall find"
Well, if you're a hammer then everyone will look like a nail
My meaning is that you will find what you're looking for ... even if it doesn't truly exist.

If you look for God then you will find him
You will assign some incident to his benevolence and believe in God.
That is the nature of faith ... you believe because you want to.

Hey, nothing wrong in that ... there are worse things
On the other hand, atheist are looking at the world and seek not to find God
They don't realize it ... and say, there ... in my life, there has been no sign of God
No help ... no divine intervention ...

I believe in the wonderful world that we live in ... the universe ...
and, that some of us can be more than we are at this moment ...
This is the road that I have choosen ... and the wheels turn on ...
this is my life ... this is my path ... anyone care to share?

They shouldn't be based on their faith. Separation of Church and State is easy to understand.


I don't deny some who have denounced their faith in God have been those who have gone through tough times. However, I would argue that is not a fair generalization of atheists in the least bit and there are less of those who turn atheist due to these circumstances than there are those who turn more towards god because of something horrible to find hope or to feel loved. I think you actually do not have a good grasp on what atheism is. Atheists are merely those without a belief in god(s). Atheists aren't emotionally in pain or wearing masks. They just have an opinion like yourself. Many denounce their belief in God merely due to their respect for science or the non-existence of any proof for god. And in reality, that is a logical choice which is far more logical than putting blind faith into any organization that tells you how to think, how to spend your money or who you should be having sex with. I have more problems with religion and their influence onto the public than I do or care for the idea of "god(s)."


This is a respectable viewpoint.

I think what u said above is more true for the religious types. For every atheist scarred by life to turn atheist, there are probably thousands if not millions of folks who turned to religious fervour after having been scarred by the crap in their lives... check out the monasteries and nunneries of all faiths, interview their inhabitants, I am sure they'll tell you some sob story one or the other...

God's Providence works that way, working in all types of situations, and those who in fact embrace God, are the better for it.

(I don't deny some who have denounced their faith in God have been those who have gone through tough times.)

You have misinterpreted what I have said. All people, no exception, seek out the knowledge about God, they then weigh the information that they have, and at that time make a decision. They sought out the information about God, and what He “God” desires of man. And they, man, decide to accept or reject.

They are not people of faith, they are only people gathering information.

(However, I would argue that is not a fair generalization of atheists in the least bit and there are less of thse who turn atheist due to these circumstances than there are those who turn more towards god because of something horrible to find hope or to feel loved.)

Your thoughts are considered, however, the fact remains, it is through situations in life, that in fact direct us all.

(I think you actually do not have a good grasp on what atheism is. Atheists are merely those without a belief in god(s).)

Again, the ideal that one can understand a subject, without first, gathering the information about it is ….I don’t want to be offensive here, so I apologize now. It would be stupid, to think that one makes a decision, contrary to thousands of years of belief, by billions of inhabitants of this world. No, they, the atheists are exactly what I’ve said above. Their suppressed anger, their refusal to yield to what they know within themselves, of what is right and wrong, this outward statement against God, isn’t derived from others, or other groups, but, their own private- unknown to us- their resentment and inward hostility against God. This is what one becomes, “An Atheist.”

Christianity in America is not in control but just influencial. In countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, etc... the government is totally in control there is no separation of Church and State. If the United States becomes majority Atheist, then they can influence the government by implementing Atheist ethics and values. The reason they still do not allow Abortion, Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Cloning, same sex marriage in America because of the influence of Christianity in the government. Even if the president is an Atheist or Muslim but the Senate is majority Christian, America will still be influenced by Christianity.

If there is no separation of Church and State in America then the de facto religion will only be allowed and all the other religions will be banned. In democracy, the people are the ones who choose their leaders and if the people wants an Atheist president and senators, so be it.

I am one. We atheists don't mix with Christians. We are two so-called sub-populations in America.

The reason is morals not infuence by the church or religion ...
Although, some of the ideas may align themselves along lines of religious morality
It is still not the same thing.

The reason for church and state is that there is a constitutional amendment to the fact
that you as an individual have a right to choose whatever religion that you want to follow.
You can't do that if one religion controls the gov't ...
They could then enact laws to ban other religions or suppress them to the point where
it effectually deminishes any signs of other religions ...
ie, no books about this religion or that one ...
No churches or churches with heavy tax ...

Atheists in control of gov't? No, not really. People will always believe in what they want to believe in ...
that is the benefit of living in this country ... To learn and grow with whatever influence that suits you.
The gov't is just to big to have all democrats or republicans ....
What makes you think that Atheist could do better?

People rely on labels to discern stuff that cannot be objectively defined and that fools alot of people!
One should look at their actions due to separation of Church and State that is frequently talked about but rarely followed.
Is USA a Christian nation? Christian by default but the Church/State separation makes it clear that the spirit of the law is (should be) the modus operandi of the country, which few acknowledge is the key.

America (USA) supposedly was founded on freedom, according to the legal statute but Christians of the era though it fine to take away the land from the native American. Is that a Christian value or a Christian imperative or was it deception?
When African were taken and sold as slaves, what kind of Christianity was that? The only imperative was power!

Atheists have a good point, in most, if not all their arguments and they are using legal precedence to show up those who claim otherwise. I would put atheists in the same vein as Progressives, in that they want to get away from emotional arguments and anger conscious objective solutions.

I'm not athiest, but I think atheism is far more logical than strictly following a God no one has proven to exist. Does it make more sense to painstakingly follow rules about what you can eat, who you can talk to, what you can wear, how often and when you have to pray, who you can marry, what job you can do, etc. that were written hundreds of years ago by people who claim a link to God?

I don't find you offensive, don't worry. I know you truely believe their is a god which is why you consistently speak of god as if fact and atheists as if in denial. You therefore must concede to the notion that you are very closed-minded to other opinions. I never claim you are just in denial, yet you do of atheists. So while I know your intention are not to offend but to 'inform,' I must politely disagree with you because you are missing the point entirely on atheism. Your faith is essentially blind, based on emotions and feelings. Whereas atheists are, generally, akin to science and the scientific method. They are just two different ways of understanding this existence. You don't have to call others who are not in your faith in denial with 'suppressed anger' and 'refusal to yield to what they know within themselves.' Because if you actually knew what atheism was, you would know this is not at all an accurate portrayal of atheism---it's yours.


I would say some particular morals align themselves heavily with certain religions. Religion is a means of telling people how god wants them to think. You get someone to believe the 'almighty' thinks one way, of coarse people will think that is what is 'moral.' They have faith in god, faith in their chosen religion and faith in the moral teachings. This is how religions gain power. They make everyone believe the same thing they do.

Here's a quote from Conan I thought appropriate:

Conan: You killed my mother! You killed my father, you killed my people! You took my father's sword... ah
[Rexor twists his arm]
Thulsa Doom: Ah. It must have been when I was younger. There was a time, boy, when I searched for steel, when steel meant more to me than gold or jewels.
Conan: The riddle... of steel.
Thulsa Doom: Yes! You know what it is, don't you boy? Shall I tell you? It's the least I can do. Steel isn't strong, boy, flesh is stronger! Look around you. There, on the rocks; a beautiful girl. Come to me, my child...
Thulsa Doom: [coaxes the girl to jump to her death]
Thulsa Doom: That is strength, boy! That is power! What is steel compared to the hand that wields it? Look at the strength in your body, the desire in your heart, I gave you this! Such a waste. Contemplate this on the tree of woe. Crucify him!

When people stop thinking for themselves and instead let someone (or 'god') think for them, people stop questioning. People have no opinions. They're just carbon copies of an ideology of someone else. If you were a politician, wouldn't you want to have that power? It's no wonder why conservatism is usually aligned with religious ideals and they think liberals are lunatics who seek anarchy.


The thing with religion, however, is it is deep seeded into people. They are raised with it more times than not and thus compare it to family and tradition---unquestioned and loved. There's no way you can argue religion and god without people getting 'emotional' and defensive. It's one of the biggest blockades to atheists who would rather discuss things rationally without emotional confusion.


It is more logical but people don't necessarily want what is logical. In this day and age when we are so advanced, people still confuse the bounds between alchemy and chemistry, astrology and astronomy, and creationism and evolution. Atheism is on the rise, not only by the numbers but by publicity. And many are in the closet about it for the negative connotations religious people have put onto non-theism. I'm sure America is roughly 10% atheist. But like I always say, it doesn't matter how few people argue for something. If their argument is sound and rational, one person can take down a legion. I think many religious people in power in this country realize this, and that is why they want atheists to go away and be silent. They know inevitably they will lose power---90% or so believe in god and many of those are Christian in this country. And absolute power corrupts, absolutely. Atheists do not want to disprove god when you see them debating on heated topics on TV. We merely want our minority rights acknowledged and obtain rationalized fairness. There's a lot of pissed off Christians who want prayer back in schools. They have argued the minority (atheists) shouldn't bully the majority (Christians). Ironically, it's the other way around.

QUOTE (mikekk86 @ Aug 8 2009, 03:39 PM)

(However, I would argue that is not a fair generalization of atheists in the least bit and there are less of thse who turn atheist due to these circumstances)….

I’ll have to repeat what I’ve have said earlier. People who decide to become atheist, are those who have researched the subjects about God and then made a conscious decisions.

[/font]



(I don't find you offensive, don't worry. I know you truely believe their is a god which is why you consistently speak of god as if fact and atheists as if in denial.)

I’ll have to repeat what I’ve have said earlier. People who decide to become atheist, are those who have researched the subjects about God and then made a conscious decisions.



(You therefore must concede to the notion that you are very closed-minded to other opinions.)

The topic subject is about what you have asked opinions on. Atheist, not myself.



[font="Arial"]…( not at all an accurate portrayal of atheism---it's yours.) Yes, you are your quite correct about that.

Sorry but Atheists are atheists not because they reject what "God" desires of man but simply because Atheists do not believe in the EXISTANCE of ANY gods or supernatural superstitious stuff unless there are concrete rational evidence to do so instead of having to rely on faith.

Buddhists are technically Atheists since they do not care about the existence of any Gods. Their focus is to seek enlightenment and abolish their mind's capacity of suffering.

Your last statement sums it up, where you say you have your own take on what atheism is. I will regretfully have to tell you, atheism's definition is:

1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

You are changing definitions to rationalize how you think about atheists. This is not only closed-minded but bigotry admitted. You can have an opinion but it doesn't change the definition of words. That's not how an opinion works. Opinions don't change facts. So it seems the underlining problem, as it always comes down to, is about facts.


The problem with the rationalization of Norman, as with many who are like him, lies in fundamental definitions. If I made "Norman" synonymous with "in denial" than I could try to get away with all kinds of crazy conclusions. As Norman has made "atheist" synonymous to "suppressed anger and resentment towards god." The problem with that, among other things, is that atheists don't believe in god---so they can't hate or resent something they don't believe in. I think Norman can understand that as we now have made this clear?

Again, the topic subject isn't about me. The subject is atheist.

You said: No, they, the atheists are exactly what I’ve said above. Their suppressed anger, their refusal to yield to what they know within themselves, of what is right and wrong, this outward statement against God, isn’t derived from others, or other groups, but, their own private- unknown to us- their resentment and inward hostility against God. This is what one becomes, “An Atheist.”

Clearly, you have taken precedence of the Bible over the dictionary and clearly you have more perceived 'insight' into the unproven than the simple proven facts of an atheist's psychology & philosophy. This is kind of a shame since you preach to many of your religion and god. It's one thing to have an opinion on another's belief, it's another to totally pervert someone else's belief to better suit you own bigotry and dogma and state it as fact in a generalized form. I certainly would not let you represent atheism, or any other non-Christian belief as you are incapable of doing so.

For someone to claim "Again, the topic subject isn't about me. The subject is atheist," you clearly do make it about you and not atheists. How ironic, and dare I confess, hypocritical.

You do not offend me but the ideals of open mindedness, free thinking, and other opinions & beliefs.

(Sorry but Atheists are atheists not because) …

Atheist, are no different than anyone else in their belief system.

The relationship that you speak of, that being, to believe in God, is only access by faith. (you might want to study that word “faith” a bit, instead of giving the normal knee jerk reaction-definition)

In any case, their are millions upon millions, who have ideals about God. They also, have gathered facts, to the best of their ability.

They, for the most part, have decided upon the information, that they have gathered, and have thus acted upon it. It’s their choice.

Atheists are in no way different from any other in how they respond to God.

They, as I have said previously, upon their results, of their private belief system, have chosen to reject the information about God, and what God desires of man.

Just like millions of others.

The Christian Bible gives great details of those who upon hearing about God, decide to reject that information.

This is openly talked about. Along with, and about heathen, the pagans, along with their beliefs. There is no secret about it, millions have follow right along with millions of others, who have rejected the information that they have received about God.

This group, which call themselves this or that name are basically no different, they, at the core are, essentially the same.

They decided to reject God. It’s their free will choice.

I wonder hmmmm supressed anger....hmmmmm... it's time mike, for you to move on.

I'm sure we will have these little chats now and again. Also, I'm sure you'll feel a little better now, that you have vented some of that suppressed anger.

Like I said, you don't offend me because I just see you as someone who truly believes in what he says (You relatively mean no harm). I used to tutor kids. If they didn't know a definition and they got it wrong, it didn't offend me either...it's really the same thing here. A mistake can not offend. The only thing that I have a problem with (and must point out because it sticks out like a sore thumb) is your closed-mindedness which in turn makes you change definitions and pervert other people's beliefs to fit your own narrow world view. It's alarming how you say how other people are, instead of saying "My opinion" or "I think." I actually find it interesting you are unable to address the question I posed to you under the spotlight. Such as why you changed the definition of "atheism." I'm advocating less of your emotions and more rationality. So while your emoticons are amusing, especially it's usage for your age group, it makes me question your maturity on the topic---or why you felt like you had to use them. Psychologically, it's a defensive and dodging move. Replacing a normal discussion with passive aggressive tactics of an immature level.

But I suppose it makes sense that you refuse to admit your closed mind and instead try to lure people into your illusion that this thread is filled with some sort of "anger." Lol, maybe you read it as anger but I wrote it with the mentality "I hope this missionary gets this definition right so we can move on to a real discussion." Which is neither happy nor angry....it's just facts and rationality. You see this, don't you? Why do you naturally escape to emotional means? Why not discuss things based on facts? However, faith is to believe without facts. And you and I both know that. You thus choose to avoid the concept at all costs. But using emoticons was a surprise...I didn't think you'd go there as your sole response, lol. It's rather disappointing but I hope you can rectify yourself.

Not looking for emotions (or emoticons), just looking for discussion & facts.

I have no further comments about this topic with you mike. Until another topic then, adios.

If all you can say is "atheists are wrong and Christians are right" of coarse you won't have anything else to say. For then you would have to explain yourself.

today, free-will is being embracing and encouraging by the consensus civilized society.

i still can't comprehend the hostile reception that atheists received by theists and the like.

everyone, from all age, gender, and status, should have the freedom to express whatever belief systems they want.

with that being said, the divine of wisdom and rationally choosing the middle ground between atheism and theism, is deism.

a philosophical system still abide by the natural law of physics and the wonderful universe, that is not intervened by a superior one, and is forbidden from any organized religions.

in other words, a system one supreme exists in the mind of all individuals, but this supreme ruler plays no crucial role in shaping the physical world.

i think Albert Einstein, the greatest mind of the 20th century, is a follower of this deistic beliefs although he chose not to believe in a personal god.

of course, i explained, you can have faith in any religious systems that fit your desire as long as it doesn't diminished atheists' free-will to seek the ultimate answer to the questions of cosmic origin, gods derivation, and what makes us evolved into now extremely spiritual specie.

i, for one, always wonder if we ever encounter another alien civilization and that this civilization has no devotion to worship any gods, does that change our perception about ourselves with faith, philosophical belief, and notably, gods itself?

our conscious and conscience shape our thinking, and effectively influence our ideological process.

if gods, indeed, is the master mind of all these, including the complexity of life, he is one truly intelligent in that we all got trick by his "game".

hey mikey, I have a previous topic posted on this board entitled, "Would you like to ask a Christian Missionary a Question..."

Now mikey, if you want too have discussion with me, then your personal attacks directed at me by name or insinuation, are going to stop.

And the using of my name in addressing others who read the forum. They also will stop.

If not adios, and to the forum's board ignored list, for forum agitators.

You decide.

Norman, your views are amazingly puerile, Mike is calling you on it and you're getting your @$$ kicked. So if you're really serious about bowing out of the argument please do so and quickly.

Wow, for me that's a nice compliment, for children are just that, to be child like. Indeed, that you know nothing of my thoughts, or anything about me. And yet for you to call me childlike!

That in itself is a nice compliment, so thanks.

For children are innocent, and that is something that I indeed try to be within myself, childlike and innocent, innocent in my heart of hearts, for those who have a preset agenda, based in arguing to a no solution platform, for they have a mindset, and their final assault, is not about the forum topic, No! it’s to attack, in a very certain way, to demean the personal character in their argument, which we can see others doing now, doing the same against President Obama.

Yet, they have tried to copy, with much success, that which they criticize! they try to imitate the Christian, how? by trying to demonstrate, that they have a faith, in what they say, and yet again, these have yet furthered copied the Christian, by then trying to explain, to a tenth degree their point.

So, it's obvious that the Christian faith, is doing well! within those who have rejected it? Their rejection’s theories, and the copied Christian techniques, that they use in their presentations, is a testament to the Christian and his spoken faith.

For them which hold to the rejectionist theories, for them to therefore copy Christianity, by trying to subvert theories, as they see relative to man.

A Christian, by his spoken faith in God, in his continual faith, in the directions for man from God, have established that which we see within the world.

That which changes man, from evil to good, and creates all that is known within the sciences, music, the arts and civilized societies, hospitals, advance technologies, the space program, foreign aid to countless billions of people around the globe.

To the highest forms of governments, the establishing of the most advance educational system with in the world. Yes, to copy one, is the highest form of flattery.

In regards to mikey, you have one point quite clear, he wants to argue, he is unreasonable, in regards to the subject topic. He will decide what he wants to do.

im an atheist. fucc your jesus, fucc your buddah and fucc your muhammad. shove those fairy tales up your @$$ norman

You've misinterpreted his comment to make yourself feel better. This is to be compared to when you said: No, they, the atheists are exactly what I’ve said above. Their suppressed anger, their refusal to yield to what they know within themselves, of what is right and wrong, this outward statement against God, isn’t derived from others, or other groups, but, their own private- unknown to us- their resentment and inward hostility against God. This is what one becomes, “An Atheist.” (btw, I don't take that personally). Your definition of atheism is your opinion, but you continue to state it as fact---continuing to pervert non-Christian beliefs to make your own belief fit better. That is why you are closed-minded in your 'argument.' I don't know you as a person, but I know what your typing and you hold responsibility to those words. You are trying to victimize yourself when clearly that is not the issue at large.

He called you childish on the basis of your immaturity here, not your 'innocence.' What you've done is commit a fallacy, on top of believing being called a child is a compliment (despite proof it certainly is not!). I don't believe you've convinced anyone otherwise through your poetry. As always, reality and facts mean more.


You seem to be filled with a lot of self-flattery. In contrast to the responses you've been getting, I think you aren't fooling anyone in particular. Well, maybe yourself but I give you more credit than that.



I have to criticize your bold statement. I do not give Christianity credit for all of those things you listed. And why do you say Christianity creates all that is known within civilized societies? Are you insinuating non-Christian societies are uncivilized? Why should Christianity have credit to "all that is known within the sciences"? I find this, again, to be perverting reality. It's no wonder why you love Christianity. You think it did everything. Or dare I assume you want people to think this is how it is? I believe we all would appreciate an EXPLANATION of such a bold statement.




I wouldn't use the word "argue" but "debate." I ask of you is to EXPLAIN the things you state--this is reasonable. I find you wanting us to believe your unexplained statements as unreasonable. But to merely ask you to clarify them? I don't think it is unreasonable at all. I feel like you should state things as opinion when they are. That was really the main problem. But you just opened a can of more problems with your last post---which I ask for you to clarify.

Thanks Norman, I know you would rather ignore me as you've stated earlier.
Reminds me of the two people in this clip who talk about atheism on CNN.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3ug8jV0xCg&feature=related ://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3ug...ature=related ://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3ug....ature=related

Atheists don't rely on faith at all. That is why they are atheists. Faith is believing without evidence. Once you stop doing that, you stop being religious.

The rest of your reply seemed to be giving Christianity credit for everything in civilization. If you're really that far gone, there's no point in discussing it.

Both of my parents are christians (of a sort.) My mother is a jehova's witness and my father is baptist. Both took me to sunday schools. Both told me to pray before I go to bed and before I eat and to thank god for every morning I wake up in good health or poor health; to thank god for waking up.

My entire life I knew that when I closed my eyes and spoke my inner monologue it was spoken solely to myself. I gave that a whirl for about 3 days. After that I just bowed my head quitely with my eyes closed and waited until everyone else was done. I thought about school or TV or my pets or boys.

A child (5 or under) doesn't have the resources or the desire to determine what is real and what isn't; o reject 'facts' or say to themselves "I don't want to believe in god." A child believes or it doesn't. I never believed. It was just that simple. I have never in my life, ever, had any part of my being that said "yes, there is a god." I've never felt it, never believed it, never felt a burning desire to know it.

I can look at the stars and the moon and look at pictures of earth from space; I can look at my house on google maps and know how small of a piece I am in a much being scheme. I know that I am not the biggest thing in the universe nor that I am the most significant. HOWEVER, I know what I feel, I know that I love and am loved by a few and hated by a few. I know that I like being happy and don't like being said. I know that I enjoy seing others happy and healthy but that sometimes I like to see others hurt. My life passes each day as it is regardless of if there is a god or not.

I may not be called an atheist by definition; it's not that I believe a god doesn't exsist. It's not that I'm unsure if a god exsist, that I don't have enough proof one way or the other.

It's that I just don't care.

I find myself socially connecting with other atheist not knowing that they are (or more to the point are not . ) I find that their stance is the same. The belief is not in them and never was. It was just not a part of life and remains such. Most atheist are not anit-god or anti-christianity. I dare say there are thousands if not millions that call themselves christians and are, in fact, atheist themselves; that they walk through their day with hollow principles and hollow pratices never actually being full of belief in what they are doing. That's it's just mechinic repition.

Everyone equates atheism with being anti-religion because the ones that are vocal are the ones that hate. You have to believe in something to hate it. Most atheist just don't give a flying fu-k about it in general. You believe in god? Good for you. It's time to eat lunch now, please pass the pepper.

You seem to be putting mis-information up about my comments. Or, if you think you haven't... then a reread on your part, will help you! in the correct interpretation of my statements.

Also...
I noticed thus far, you haven't commented on AzNboii ? hmmmm

Could it be you are likeminded? hmmm

Norman, you seem to be saying that Christianity has achieved the highest form of government and the highest standards of education. Neither of these is true. In other posts you have, at the very least, implied that the arts and sciences are Christian and that whatever else was achieved by non-Christians was "unimportant." Once again, you are provable wrong. I shall not bother to bring up examples because they are so numerous and obvious that your intellect has to be virtually non-working to make the statements that you have.

Now, If I am wrong--and I hope I am--then state right here and now where the arts and sciences came from. State here and now what the highest form of government is and the highest standard of education. State it right now--don't direct me back to some post or other--state it right now so that there is no confusion.

As for Aznboi, he is stating his opinion and I could care less what his opinion is. I am confronting you because of your statements concerning the origin of the arts and sciences. Those are not opinions but simply wrong statements put out as fact.

That was well said. I grew up deciding for myself, which many Americans can't say as many are forced to go to church or pray or accept god unquestioned (faith). As for myself, I know the question of whether there is god or not is unanswerable. Not to elevate the concept of god at all, for proving there is no flying pink unicorn in Andromeda right now is unanswerable just the same! But for such deep questions man has foolishly thought he was big enough to answer with full faith and certainty. One must concede to the uncertainty of the unknown. We are just human...we are not all-knowing. And I truly believe God did not create man, but man created God. Because I feel this way, I have personally thought of myself as an agnostic atheist. We should all be agnostic, but this doesn't mean we can't come to an opinion on one side or the other. Many people don't understand the terminology quite well so to keep it simple, I just call myself an atheist half the time (as even 'atheist' allows for a strong and weak version of an atheist). And if I feel like telling people I am atheist will somehow offend them, I just say I don't believe in God instead. It's funny how people get offended. But I understand to many, religion, god and faith are as synonymous to them as family and long lived tradition. So my non-belief is a threat to all that they symbolically hold dear to themselves.


Thanks for taking up the mantle. Norman has much to learn, though it reminds me of the saying,"Old dogs can't learn new tricks." He's so focused on how his faith is 100% right that he's missing the big picture.

I have no problem with presenting some of the relative information, in regards to my statements, about the arts and sciences.

However....you seem to have a memory problem, of how just exactly you entered this topic forum.

Again your mis-information about your reasonings, is mis-placed...

So that being,.... there is this matter in which you state your reason for confronting me, is about the arts and sciences.

hmmm

You maybe have forgotten, you were not on the board, nether had you added anything to the topic, "atheist."

Out of the blue, you come on the board, you came with your ridicule. see below.


(Norman, your views are amazingly puerile, Mike is calling you on it and you're getting your @$$ kicked. So if you're really serious about bowing out of the argument please do so and quickly)

The subject was atheist.

Your continual mis information, your memory lapses, makes me suspect of your sincerity of a open discussion.

It seems to me, and I could be mistaken, your action's, are the like' of others, that are the forum-board runners, who's object is to instigate, and do nothing further. You have had no genuine input on the original topic (atheist), except, for some reason, to critize me.

That was your introduction to this forum and it's topic, as you have so plainly demonsrated.

Well....we'll just see how you respond to all of this.

Seems like Norman is again avoiding explaining his statements and believes those who ask him to explain his statements are misplaced and off topic. In essence, Norman wants to tell us what to believe, without explaining why and wants to take no responsibility to his statements thus far. In my opinion, it actually seems like he is actively avoiding explaining himself.

I started this topic and am the original poster. All the discussions going on here so far are EXACTLY on topic to Atheists in America: Your Opinion? My first post here stated:

"I was looking up news coverage on atheism in America and found that they were widely misunderstood, 'hated,' and often debated against with false historical references as main points. I was wondering what the overall consensus was in the forums on atheism. I do not believe people know exactly what it is or understand why atheism is having a sort of movement in America."

Clearly this thread is on topic as it could ever be. So Norman's accusations of there being 'off topic replies' is misinformed---and he's not even speaking as if he has an opinion but a clear message of 100% certainty. Please continue discussions as they are very revealing.

I always thought that Atheism was largely an Anglo-American movement that came as a result of some kind of conflict between politics and Christian religion. You know in the West, there is still an issue with religion and science, but when you move to the East, such things have never really been in conflict.

I was raised in puerto rico and germany in my childhood. Still an atheist. It's not so much a movement for most as it is general indiffernce.

From what I see in America, it appears to be a coincidence that atheists are all beginning to state their voice in public. Some of it has to do with atheists being tired of having their minority voice unheard or ignored. Another part of it has to do with the times. Also, when religion and politics start to collide into the public scene, I think many atheists have risen up to debate against it, such as Michael Newdow on behalf of the Pledge debate, and more recently the Atheist Bus Campaign. It's causes others to 'come out of the closet.' There's been a couple of best selling books, such as by Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens. It's not your typical classic 'movement' at all, but it certainly has gotten the attention of people despite it's unofficial emergence. And some, who have never really had to think or talk about atheism, are now doing just that. I think it's a good thing.

I agree. A lot of people do seem to really have that idea that it's "freedom of religion, not freedom from religion." That they'll honour your ideas if you believe in a different god or worship but if you don't believe in a god at all that you're some kind of heathen, undeserving of rights, opinion or voice.

I work in a very "alternative" office. Due to the feild we're in we have a very large number of vocal atheist (and vegetarians/ vegans. :P) We have a "seasonal celebration" every year rather than a "holiday" or "christmas" party. I admit, it's limiting. I'm not christian but I enjoy the christmas season as much as anyone. Just because I don't believe in god doesn't mean I don't enjoy tinsle, a good catchy carol or a can of cranberry. LOL, it's pretty bad when you're an atheist and vocal kill-joy atheist drive you nuts!

My roommate actually brought this up yesterday on the way home. She's severely adverse to the idea of religion and the people that follow it. She's very personally offended that we have a friend that is the sweetest person in the whole wide world, never obtrusive or rude but that everyday she sits across from us, talking, listening smiling and trully believing that we're going to burn in hell. While I don't share my roommate's sentiments, I can certainly understand her ire.

I think the idea that most vocal anti-theist (being different from the atheist) are trying to get across is you may have a freedom of speech and religion but what about my freedom to not have to listen to it? If we are a nation with a base formed on the freedom of ideas, why am I bound by the limits of your religion?

Freedom of religion should also practice respect of religions.

I think the Atheists sometimes go overboard like the ones in the Atheists Bus Ad Campaign. When an Atheist tells me that there is no God I get offended what more if it is a Bus Advertisement which is 100x more offending.

If the Atheists do not need to advertise if they want to voice out they can distribute leaflets instead which is more subtle.

The bus ads are a direct parody of the religious Christian Bus ads that came before them. There would be a link on the bus ad to go to their Christian site where they would say non believers would burn in hell. So some atheists got together and decided to parody the ads. Sometimes anyone can go overboard, but in the case of the atheist bus ads, I think they are fighting fire with fire. So don't blame the atheists alone. Or tell Christians to pass out leaflets too---you can't just tell one belief to shut up and the other to do whatever it wants.

It seems that it is very much alright to puts ads on buses that say ...
Go with God ... or visit your church ... or stuff about God
No one seems to take offense.

But, when someone puts ads up that let others know what atheist believe then
it becomes offensive????? Why????

One ad says God exist and the other say no, God doesn't exist.
They are just opinions ...

Now, move to the middle east ... you have people of one faith fighting people of another faith
Divided by what? Ethinicity? Culture? Religion? God?
They are all opinions ... faith requires no proof. Only the desire to believe is needed.

It becomes a fight where people suffer and die ... and for what?
To answer the question of whether to open a boiled egg on the smaller side or the other
(Gulliver's Travels)
Does anyone see the futility in this fight? Debate? No?
Guess I must be only avisitor here.

The Atheists started the bus ads and the Christian bus ads was a resonse the the Atheist bus ads. Christians won't advertise on Bus Ads in the first place because it is very expensive. Christians would just put up a billboard probably inside the vicinity of a Church territory which is very much cheaper.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/03/c...t_n_250039.html

I think these Bus Ads must stop because this may go out of proportion in might trigger an violent outbreak between the Atheists and Christians.

You have it backwards. Christians put ads advertising religion and god. Atheists got fed up with it and put up an ad of their own. In response to that, Christians put up ads AGAIN but this time directed it specifically at the atheist ads. That's the real story.

lol, this is getting amusing and fun.

i'm not an atheist by any means.

but for the church to respond to an atheist's ads is very childish.

it's like two kids fighting over 1 piece of pie, but in this case, the pie is the existence of gods.