Atheists, how do you view them?

[Danny Z]

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Atheist trademarks? What does atheism have to do with gays and all those up there? I know atheists who are more intolerant than I am to what i call moral decadence.

Not atheist trademarks, but definitely not religious trademarks, so my question was to the person who said that as long as people agree with global ethics he is ok with them, what if somebody is gay or somebody that tolerates gays? what if somebody wants to have gay have equal rights in adoption. Is this ethically acceptable? or do we go back to the religious books and accuse him of being atheists?
My answer is that global ethics change with time, what is once accepted, centuries later might become obsolete, and this includes religion, maybe five hundred years from now somebody will open a thread asking people:
"Religious people, how do you view them?"

[chafic]

Originally Posted by Omeros

my mistake ... i used same term in different cases
well in the second case : give us a proof and each one will say if he was convinced !
and its not in religion it concern what we call "brain"

To be honest, I have no idea what you are talking about.

Originally Posted by Gaius Julius Caesar

Religion is enlightening to those who follow God, and it is blinding to those who follow manmade traditions. Some Atheists may be enlightened as far as the material world; but they choose to only see what’s observable, to explore the contents of the visible world, yet, they never scratch the surface in seeing the invisible force that drives every aspect of our universe. The force of life has to begin somewhere, all energy has to flow and originate from a common source, and therefore, a religious person is more enlightened because he can look beyond the physical boundaries of this universe, while an Atheist cannot because he denies the existence of God, who is the invisible force behind the physical universe and the source of all energy.

Well, I don't think the intent of the thread is to discussatheism, but simply how atheists are looked at; that's why I didn't elaborate. I understand your point though, and of course do not agree, but I'll leave my arguments for an appropriate thread.

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

Not atheist trademarks, but definitely not religious trademarks, so my question was to the person who said that as long as people agree with global ethics he is ok with them, what if somebody is gay or somebody that tolerates gays? what if somebody wants to have gay have equal rights in adoption. Is this ethically acceptable? or do we go back to the religious books and accuse him of being atheists?

Yes, definitely not religious trademarks because religious people are not slaves to materialism, they see further beyond that. If people call for such rights, there will always be those who call against. Whoever wins wins. It's ethically not acceptable because it's a psychological disease. All such people have issues. They are troubled either from childhood or from some adult experience. Being born abnormal is normal, but switching sex after having a family is the epitome of retardism. In any case, it's a human nature to drift towards what's wrong (always), do you have the strenght to say no inspite of all the wrong that's going on around you? That's the challenge.

My answer is that global ethics change with time, what is once accepted, centuries later might become obsolete, and this includes religion, maybe five hundred years from now somebody will open a thread asking people:
"Religious people, how do you view them?"

Of course one day this question would be asked; that's what religion says. It's not ethics that change, it's the people that drop ethics because they don't want to be bound by anything. They don't want limits, and thus drop all values. We're making sure that what is so wrong (even scientifically -for those who preach knowledge) is right. Tatawwor haida ya khayye, tatawwor w 7adara.

The question should be "Do you have a problem with atheists who preach immorality?" The answer is "Yes, big times".

[Danny Z]

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Yes, definitely not religious trademarks because religious people are not slaves to materialism, they see further beyond that. If people call for such rights, there will always be those who call against. Whoever wins wins. It's ethically not acceptable because it's a psychological disease. All such people have issues. They are troubled either from childhood or from some adult experience. Being born abnormal is normal, but switching sex after having a family is the epitome of retardism. In any case, it's a human nature to drift towards what's wrong (always), do you have the strenght to say no inspite of all the wrong that's going on around you? That's the challenge.

Of course one day this question would be asked; that's what religion says. It's not ethics that change, it's the people that drop ethics because they don't want to be bound by anything. They don't want limits, and thus drop all values. We're making sure that what is so wrong (even scientifically -for those who preach knowledge) is right. Tatawwor haida ya khayye, tatawwor w 7adara.

The question should be "Do you have a problem with atheists who preach immorality?" The answer is "Yes, big times".

You see you fell into the trap of defining what's immoral.
For some people it is immoral stupid and unconceivable that a guy dies and revives two days later, and that a guy that does not know how to write or read has been dictated a book by God.
If humanity remained stuck to what religious people believed in and there was no tattawwor, the people would still be putting their sons to death for the good of the God of the sun, and earth would still have been the center of the universe and the sun rotates around it.
Yes values change with time, those values include new religions that are born and others that die.
Values are defined by society, and not by a book written 2000 years ago.

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

You see you fell into the trap of defining what's immoral.

What is immoral is well known.

For some people it is immoral stupid and unconceivable that a guy dies and revives two days later, and that a guy that does not know how to write or read has been dictated a book by God.

Where do these standrads come from? lol Are they supposed to be religious standards?

If humanity stuck to what religious people believed in and there was no tattawwor, the people would still be putting their sons to death for the good of the God of the sun, and earth would still have been the center of the universe and the sun rotates around it.

That's not religion, that's kufr. i.e. the total opposite. We're talking about God, Allah ya3ne, not a multi limbed statue.

Yes values change with time, those values include new religions that are born and others that die.

Monotheism was always there. If we follow you're logic our motto will be "clothing optional".

[Danny Z]

It is hard to discuss with people that are not open to discussion. All the west is immoral according to Dalzi, khoudou el 7ikma min afwah Dalzi.

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

It is hard to discuss with people that are not open to discussion. All the west is immoral according to Dalzi, khoudou el 7ikma min afwah Dalzi.

Did I say takhallouf? I said tatawwor w 7adara. Add to that "infita7".

So, all the west is gay? lol If it was all gay, you think i'd mind? Nope

Dakhl 7ekmtak ana. . Stoflo, do whatever you want, as long as our kids are not poluted, fine by us.

[False Morel]

I noticed that all the members who replied dont approve nor believe in some of those restrictions and limits set by some biased societies and communities not only on atheists but also on any other minority. This is delightful and promising. However, in Lebanon, we still need a lot more to achieve and implement in our communities. Maybe one of these achievements is to merge those communites into a single one, whereas all the current discriminations and fanaticisms would get wiped off!

Originally Posted by abientot

Well these were not rhetorics, it's not like atheists are running around telling people that they are atheists, and it is not like im asking people if they believe in god right after i ask them what their name is.

I dont think discrimination against atheists is still that strong in Lebanon especially among the youth, however ure right, it is still an issue for some people, but i guess these people dont have issues with atheism only but with anything that is different than their own religion.

You can simply google out articles, books, reports, opinions on discrimination agaisnt atheists (throughout history and in the meanwhile)

Even in the US ("the land of the free") Bush once said that he thought atheists dont have the right to vote!
What about the cases in some countries (including lebanon) where you must be registered by some religion to be treated as a citizen!
What about the repetitive attacks (media mainly) and incitements against seculars and non-religous from churches and islamic authorities around the world..
What about the social oppression?

However, i neglected all this. What i wanted to discuss is the personal takes on atheists, since this constitute eventually the general behavior towards them. As i said, i got positive responses. It's good to see that most of the users equate them with any other religion/sect. If i had replaced the Roum instead for instance, i would have got the same responses! And that's why you and others got pissed off from the idea for an example. but lets face it, the vast majority dont think the same way. it's the same case when most of the lebanese admit their opposition to sectarianism, and even openly criticize it, but when one of these meets someone, the first thing he tries to do is to figure out to which sect this person belongs in order to practice his racist prejudice against him!

you think i'm exaggerating because you and the environment (circle of friends and aquaintance) live by think that way. but it isnt the general case!

atheists in most societies, including the liberal ones such as the american society, dont admit their true beliefs just because they are afraid of alienation, social and civil discrimination, and in some cases cleansing!

Originally Posted by doc

der FPBer,
i meant the courage a human being must have to know that he's on his own in this world. If he does good things, well it's because he must ,in order to have a society where we can normally evolve,and not in order to be awarded and welcomed in heavens ( which is the reason given to believers, who are raised on the fear of the existence of Hell) .
May be it's very simplistic, but it's true
I live in Paris, many paolple are atheists, and morally and socially they have nothing to envy believers.....

you stressed a very hot spot here! but as i stated there is no need to go through this discussion. however, i fully agree

i'd like to illustrate some definitions and info at this point.

-------------
-------------

there are two forms of atheism. implicit/explicit one, and positive/negative one.
implicit: includes newborns and other people who have not been exposed to theistic ideas.
explicit: believe/decide by conviction.

negative(weak): explicit, and skeptics about the idea, agnostics for example.
positive(strong): explicit, firm belief of the non-existance of any deities nor supernatural powers

however, atheism alone stands for positive atheism usually.

-------------
-------------

since you live in france, you might be interested in this:
in europe, a broad study (the full report) was carried out in 2005, in which a poll was conducted about this issue.

Q2 Which of these statements comes closest to your beliefs?

1. I believe there is a God
2. I believe there is some sort of spirit or life force
3. I don’ t believe there is any sort of spirit, God or life force
4. DK

1. 52% 2. 27% 3. 18% 4. 3%

but if we ommit turkey, the first option would decrease beneath 50%..

however, West Europe, with the exception of portugal and ireland tends for option 2 & 3, with highest percentages for the third option east germany (>50%) as a region and france (33%) as a country.
and of course of those 52%, less than 10% religious. the rest(90%) just believe. with the exception of turkey, malta, and romania.

Originally Posted by Dalzi

Yes, definitely not religious trademarks because religious people are not slaves to materialism, they see further beyond that. If people call for such rights, there will always be those who call against. Whoever wins wins. It's ethically not acceptable because it's a psychological disease. All such people have issues. They are troubled either from childhood or from some adult experience. Being born abnormal is normal, but switching sex after having a family is the epitome of retardism. In any case, it's a human nature to drift towards what's wrong (always), do you have the strenght to say no inspite of all the wrong that's going on around you? That's the challenge.

Of course one day this question would be asked; that's what religion says. It's not ethics that change, it's the people that drop ethics because they don't want to be bound by anything. They don't want limits, and thus drop all values. We're making sure that what is so wrong (even scientifically -for those who preach knowledge) is right. Tatawwor haida ya khayye, tatawwor w 7adara.

The question should be "Do you have a problem with atheists who preach immorality?" The answer is "Yes, big times".

2awal shi you were defending atheists with the right argument that this is not related to atheism. ley ghayarti ra2yik?! :D

Dalzi, this what you identify as immorality others identify as a free of choice ;)
those are the open minded, civilzed, and intellectual people. not necessarily atheists! as you earlier stated, there are atheists who'd go even further than conservative religious people regarding this issue!
i'd say also, not necessarily if you think the opposite, that would mean you're narrow minded, uncivilized, and ignorant. only i think so

now as i said, atheism has nothing to do with those. if someone labels these acts or other as immoralities, laws can be made to forbid them.

we dont need religion to keep people away from such acts by threating if you do any of these things there is a special place full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish where you will be sent to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever till the end of time

[abientot]

Der FPBer, i did not say that there was no discrimination, i agreed with you on the fact that atheists are attacked on several levels, i just dont think it is that strong anymore on the social level (in Lebanon), like when two friends are socializing for example (you're right, you still have to be registered according to a certain religion which is a whole issue in itself because you do not get to choose your religion in the first place, so kif ma ykoun ma baddak wala we7deh mennon but im talking about the casual everyday life), enno i think that it's not that bad anymore considering the current situation, it used to be much worse, but things are evolving, though slowly nevertheless they are evolving.

So yes discrimination exists and it always will, but as i mentioned in a previous post, i think that the people who have issues with atheism also have issues with people who are 'different' because i feel that once you are able to accept people who are from a different religion for example, i dont see why you shouldnt be able to accept atheists because the way i view atheism is as a religion whose followers believe that there is no God

[Dalzi]

Originally Posted by der FPBer

2awal shi you were defending atheists with the right argument that this is not related to atheism. ley ghayarti ra2yik?! :D

It's not related to atheism, but if an atheist is going to bring up atheism to defend retardism, then it becomes related to the fact that he/she needs chaining to know where to stop.

Dalzi, this what you identify as immorality others identify as a free of choice ;)
those are the open minded, civilzed, and intellectual people.

Yeah, the Australian woman who married her dad is also an "open minded, civlized, and intellectual person" .

Not necessarily atheists! as you earlier stated, there are atheists who'd go even further than conservative religious people regarding this issue!

Yes true, and I have no problem with those. In fact, the disastrous people are the ones who think they know religion while they're clueless, those are a catastrophe, I can't stand them.

i'd say also, not necessarily if you think the opposite, that would mean you're narrow minded, uncivilized, and ignorant. only i think so

I'm very happy with narrow mindedness, stupidity, dumbness, retardism, idiocy, whatever, when it comes from such kind of people. It's an honor to be the total opposite to what they are. Thank God.

now as i said, atheism has nothing to do with those. if someone labels these acts or other as immoralities, laws can be made to forbid them.

we dont need religion to keep people away from such acts by threating if you do any of these things there is a special place full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish where you will be sent to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever till the end of time

It's not the laws that stop you or what you are referring to as fear. It's how much you are ready to bring yourself down to the pits.

Who said to you that fearing God is what stops some people from doing what others do? As I said before, many atheists would shoot you if you lump them with others.

Yallah, heik a7san ma te3jo2 ljanne, if we go there we'd have more room .