Topic: Why do Atheists Hate Religion? - page 14. (Read 901520 times)

I cut out the extraneous to highlight the core of your argument. Your problem is you reject a moral authority higher than mankind.

This leads you to the erroneous belief that the collective cannot by definition get it “wrong” they are the collective your ultimate arbiter of truth and value.

You deny the existence of a moral standard that would allow you to reject a new and legitimately passed law as evil or immoral. Thus your dismissal of religion and interest in secular law.

You should take a moment to reread the Declaration of Independence. The people who set up the foundations of the law we live under had far more wisdom. Their views were deeply grounded in the personal religious beliefs you find so irrelevant.

The video essay of CS Lewis I shared earlier comes to mind. You are the gentleman asking “will it increase the happiness of the majority?”

Man or Rabbit? by CS Lewis

...
What do you mean "get it wrong"?  
...
it is voted on and eventually passed.
...
The moral foundation is based on our collective determination
...
Good, new laws are passed.  Bad laws are dropped.

I am not sure why we're even discussing religions in the 21st century.  We don't discuss witchcraft and reincarnation anymore.  Time to drop the charade.
 

I am not sure why we're even discussing religions in the 21st century.  We don't discuss witchcraft and reincarnation anymore.  Time to drop the charade.

When you break the employment laws, you break the law, it does not matter if you are a Christian, Wiccan, Buddist or a Jew.

Your personal religious beliefs and/or superstitions are irrelevant.

Obey the law, or be prepared to pay the piper.

Democrats in Congress are pushing “equality” legislation that critics say would criminalize Christianity, Islam, and Judaism by forcing virtually every institution in society — including religious institutions — to hire, serve, and promote homosexuals and individuals confused about their gender. A number of analysts have warned that by enshrining “sexual orientation” in the statute, even pedophilia and pederasty could be protected. In the House of Representatives, Democrats already have more than enough co-sponsors to pass the bill. And in the Senate, they are getting very close. But a massive coalition of critics from across the political spectrum and a broad array of religious traditions is rising up to stop it before it is too late. 

Among other changes, the so-called Equality Act, also known as H.R. 5 in the House and S. 788 in the Senate, purports to “prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation.” To do that, it would enshrine actual or perceived “sexual orientation and gender identity” into federal statutes. That would give homosexuality, transgenderism, and other perversions of human sexuality and gender the same protections as race or sex in employment, housing, public accommodations, and more. Incredibly, the legislation specifically states that religious freedom may not be used as a defense under the bill. And it applies to churches, religious schools, religious hospitals, religious employers, gathering places, sports, all government entities, and more.

Of course you show something. You show that you can't even do research. This shows that most of your talk is meaningless. But if it has meaning, it is just by accident.

Well at least I show something, you keep making outrageous claims and never show anything. You keep saying idiotic shit like science is proving creationism and other stupid shit when scientists are the group with most atheists, are you actually insane?

Thank you. You are just like many scientists who want to hide aspects of the truth. You only show the stuff you want, but just can't seem to find the stuff you don't like.

True, you are probably one of the few people who keep claiming science did or say that but never actually provide any links or studies and you are shown how wrong you are every single time, then you say something like, ahh but we don't know if those studies are right, bla bla.

Good cover. After all, many people don't want to embarrass themselves by admitting straight out that they don't know how to use an Internet search engine.

Yes and it says that science does not suggest there is a soul/spirit in each human.

So, you've been to the library, eh? But do you know how to use an Internet search engine?

 

Right... when exactly has science done that? I would like to know, perhaps you can show us. Science suggests that death is, well, death, nothingness, there is nothing right now that suggests there is something else after death, not that it can't be possible since we don't know everything but if we are talking about what science suggests, that's what it suggests.

^^^ Your expressed view is quite unscientific. After all, science is starting to suggest that there is such a thing as a spirit in each one of us.

The choice is between materialism and spiritualism (which can lead to the belief in the supernatural which in turn leads to theism).

BTW, materialism can also lead to existentialism and/or humanism; and theism can lead to nihilism if your deity views human life as worthless.

You suffer from myopic Christian vision.

Although nihilism and existentialism are distinct philosophies, they are often confused with one another as both are rooted in the human experience of anguish and confusion stemming from the apparent meaninglessness of a world in which humans are compelled to find or create meaning.[51] A primary cause of confusion is that Friedrich Nietzsche is an important philosopher in both fields. Existentialist philosophers often stress the importance of Angst as signifying the absolute lack of any objective ground for action, a move that is often reduced to a moral or an existential nihilism.