JcP

yes it does, but you missed my point. BIGOTRY thrives...religion is merely an excuse for bigotry. As I said, billions of religious people have lived without hatred, war, discrimination, and blowing up children. Me being one of them!
So using religious bigotry as a condemnation of the concept of religion is backwards logic. That's like saying adolescence leads to murder, since some adolescents shoot up their schools.

edit: HA! this made me just think about "guns don't kill people, people kill people!" Perhaps spiritual/religious thoughts in the hands of stupid people leads to an increase in "mishaps", just as guns do.
With guns, I agree that it's the PERSON who kills people, but also that the gun culture in our country increases the odds of gun death...
So I still disagree with your basic argument, but perhaps we can agree that religion, in the hands of idiots, does cause damage.
So we're talking about excuses? We're missing each other on the debate highway atm. I know Atheism has never been used as an excuse for war (yet, as South Park so brilliantly parodied a couple seasons ago), violence, or what have you...but that's not fair.
Atheists HAVE been violent, been in wars, been discriminatory, etc. So my point is that your proposed suggestion that religion leads to war, violence, etc. isn't kosher, as those acts are PERSONAL CHOICE, not a product of a given faith. For instance, a muslim man is approached by Osama Bin Laden. He can choose to blow up a building in the name of Allah or not. It is that man that should be judged, not the excuses or "reasons" he gives.

And it only takes one atheist terrorist for this to be completely moot. And I hate to say it, but I'm sure it's just a matter of time.
Two reasons: 1) because he claims science as his own...and proposes that if you disagree with him you are not intelligent...fuckin g enfuriating... and 2) Because his argument(s) are the argument(s) countless young atheists use in repetition without thought or investigation. And his arguments always fall short for me in blatant ways, especially his most famous quote about going one God further. It's a completely assinine comment as the leap from multiple Gods to One God is a completely different type of change than some sort of God to NO God.

Disbelief is a belief, as you are basing your disbelief on belief(s). Double negatives like that in debates get twisty sometimes, but I hope that makes sense.

but i'm with you on church and state, even as a "believer." I know I don't know for sure the truth about things, and it's not my place to dictate to others who are just as clueless as I am (including atheists).

So just so I'm clear...you're proposing atheism is not believing in a God, but recognizing that there could be one (even if you find it improbable like the teapot around Saturn).

As long as the uncertainty is present in your belief system, more power to you. It's when people like Dawkins, and other types of fundamentalists in classic religious traditions, profess they hold the only truth that my bullshit radar goes off.

so perhaps that's the happy compromise between atheism and deism/agnostic/buddhism/whatever else: the admittance of uncertainty.

I am always willing to admit "I don't know." I BELIEVE in something...would you agree that you don't know, but you DON'T BELIEVE in something?

As (I think it was...) Plato said: "I don't know. But I know I don't know."

__________________

Just look out around us, people fightin their wars...
They think they'll be happy when they've settled their scores...
Let's lay down our weapons
and hold us apart
be still for just a minute
try to open our hearts
MORE LOVE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Rev It's not what you see, it's that you're looking.