The unimportant news thread

Started by Lethevich, March 05, 2008, 07:14:50 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

greg

Atheist conferences? What would even be the point?  ???
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Mirror Image

Quote from: greg on June 03, 2019, 03:12:54 PM
Atheist conferences? What would even be the point?  ???

I can only imagine what that would be like: "So you don't believe in God? Well, guess what? Nobody here does!" [Two hour lunch break ensues.] :D

Ken B

Quote from: greg on June 03, 2019, 03:12:54 PM
Atheist conferences? What would even be the point?  ???
Samuel Pepys used to like going to sermons. He would attend several on a Sunday. Hours of sermons.
He especially liked fire&damnation sermons.

I think he and the attendees of such conferences are there for the exact same reason.

drogulus


     
Quote from: greg on June 03, 2019, 03:12:54 PM
Atheist conferences? What would even be the point?  ???

     Exactly, no hole to fill, but consider there are issues that affect atheists enough to gather on occasion. In my case I had some involvement with New Atheism. We were mostly concerned with "best defense is a good offense". IMV we needed to have the ball for some time and not just meekly plead for tolerance, but show how intolerant we could be of an intolerant culture. The effect has been extraordinary. People are far less willing to fuck with us. We made space for ourselves and the world is different for the growing number of young ones who take acceptance for granted.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

JBS

Quote from: drogulus on June 03, 2019, 07:01:32 PM
     
     Exactly, no hole to fill, but consider there are issues that affect atheists enough to gather on occasion. In my case I had some involvement with New Atheism. We were mostly concerned with "best defense is a good offense". IMV we needed to have the ball for some time and not just meekly plead for tolerance, but show how intolerant we could be of an intolerant culture. The effect has been extraordinary. People are far less willing to fuck with us. We made space for ourselves and the world is different for the growing number of young ones who take acceptance for granted.

Almost all the New Atheism I have encountered seems to be intolerant  from the get go. 

On a more general note, I think both of you (and most everyone else) might find a book titled Nature's God by Matthew Stewart to be a good read. He argues that almost all of the Founders were atheists, and that the political philosophy they espoused could only be developed via atheism. He more or less wears his own atheism on his sleeve. I don't totally agree with him, but he's certainly closer to the truth than the people who insist America is a "Christian" nation, and he includes much of the evidence that proves them wrong.


Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

Ken B

#2985
Quote from: JBS on June 03, 2019, 07:31:16 PM
Almost all the New Atheism I have encountered seems to be intolerant  from the get go. 

On a more general note, I think both of you (and most everyone else) might find a book titled Nature's God by Matthew Stewart to be a good read. He argues that almost all of the Founders were atheists, and that the political philosophy they espoused could only be developed via atheism. He more or less wears his own atheism on his sleeve. I don't totally agree with him, but he's certainly closer to the truth than the people who insist America is a "Christian" nation, and he includes much of the evidence that proves them wrong.

Hmm. That thesis is pretty incredible. I recall reading a bit about the religions of the founders. Some were certainly Christian, Adams for example, and a large number were almost certainly deists, Jefferson for example. Almost none were atheists, although Franklin might have been. Some are hard to pin down between Christian and deist, Washington being the most famous example. (FWIW I think the evidence supports him being a conventional Anglican, ie not pious).

Needless to say but I will anyway, they most certainly were not founding a Christian Nation. They were founding a secular nation, most of whose inhabitants were Christian.

drogulus

Quote from: JBS on June 03, 2019, 07:31:16 PM
Almost all the New Atheism I have encountered seems to be intolerant  from the get go. 





     I think that's a fair point. But then how likeable should atheists be? Not very IMO. First we have to show we won't be pushed around any more, we can have prickly assholes like Dawkins on our team and oh, even atheists don't like him, and so what? Dawkins wrote The Selfish Gene, not Mr. Nice Guy. No, being liked isn't even on the radar.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Ken B

As for tolerance. I have been an atheist since a young age, assertively so in high school, and I believe I have never been punished for it or shunned because of it.

JBS

Quote from: Ken B on June 03, 2019, 07:56:00 PM
Hmm. That thesis is pretty incredible. I recall reading a bit about the religions of the founders. Some were certainly Christian, Adams for example, and a large number were almost certainly deists, Jefferson for example. Almost none were atheists, although Franklin might have been. Some are hard to pin down between Christian and deist, Washington being the most famous example. (FWIW I think the evidence supports him being a conventional Anglican, ie not pious).

Needless to say but I will anyway, they most certainly were not founding a Christian Nation. They were founding a secular nation, most of whose inhabitants were Christian.

His argument is founded on the premise that Deism was atheism, and accepted by such by everyone back then. He presents a good deal of evidence to support that.  He says Adams was at most a very liberal Christian, but probably a deist. And his main point is that without Deism, the political ideas of the Founders would not exist.

Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

drogulus

Quote from: Ken B on June 03, 2019, 08:09:50 PM
As for tolerance. I have been an atheist since a young age, assertively so in high school, and I believe I have never been punished for it or shunned because of it.

     I can't recall ever having a negative experience because of my atheism. Lots of it comes from family and where you grow up. My mother was the ferocious one who thought religion was a conspiracy to keep people ignorant and servile. What a daft idea!
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Ken B

Quote from: JBS on June 03, 2019, 08:22:57 PM
His argument is founded on the premise that Deism was atheism, and accepted by such by everyone back then. He presents a good deal of evidence to support that.  He says Adams was at most a very liberal Christian, but probably a deist. And his main point is that without Deism, the political ideas of the Founders would not exist.
It's false. Deists believed in god, but not in revelation.
He might be right that Deism was essential — I have no idea — but he is just absurdly wrong to call that atheism.
Sounds like typical argument overreach: " not only is it not a Christian nation, it's not even just secular, it's actually Atheist. Take that Jerry Falwell!!"

JBS

Quote from: Ken B on June 03, 2019, 08:44:47 PM
It's false. Deists believed in god, but not in revelation.
He might be right that Deism was essential — I have no idea — but he is just absurdly wrong to call that atheism.
Sounds like typical argument overreach: " not only is it not a Christian nation, it's not even just secular, it's actually Atheist. Take that Jerry Falwell!!"

He brings evidence to show Deism was atheism, and that Deist talk a bout God was mostly a figleaf. Remember that back in the 18th century, it was still possible, if you were unlucky enough in your neighbors and the judges, to be executed for expressing atheism aka blasphemy.

The book can be Kindled although a paperback copy is not really more expensive
https://www.amazon.com/Natures-God-Heretical-American-Republic/dp/0393064549/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Nature%27s+God&qid=1559624332&s=gateway&sr=8-1

Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

drogulus

Quote from: Ken B on June 03, 2019, 08:44:47 PM
It's false. Deists believed in god, but not in revelation.


      I don't think "believe in" captures it. Reason was preferred to belief. Only a god knowable by means of reason is knowable at all. A god with no revelation is Spinozan, an "...or nature" god.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Florestan

Florestan: Pope Francis' being enthusiastically welcome in a mostly Orthodox country is a sign of tolerance and ecumenism.
drogulus: Atheists don't need no effing tolerance. Aggressiveness and selfishness is the name of the game.
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

drogulus

Quote from: Florestan on June 04, 2019, 12:37:52 AM
Florestan: Pope Francis' being enthusiastically welcome in a mostly Orthodox country is a sign of tolerance and ecumenism.
drogulus: Atheists don't need no effing tolerance. Aggressiveness and selfishness is the name of the game.


      What is tolerance and ecumenism a sign of if not that religion is "resting"?

      I agree that it's good that Romania welcomes Francis and that Francis wants to be welcomed. I'm more tolerant of tolerance than intolerance.
     


     
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Ken B

Quote from: Florestan on June 04, 2019, 12:37:52 AM
Florestan: Pope Francis' being enthusiastically welcome in a mostly Orthodox country is a sign of tolerance and ecumenism.


Depends on the pope. This one is gawd offal. (That may or may not be better than average for popes.)

Florestan

Quote from: Ken B on June 04, 2019, 07:53:10 AM
Depends on the pope. This one is gawd offal.

Why? Did he do, or say, anything contrary to the Gospels?
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

Quote from: Florestan on June 04, 2019, 08:25:19 AM
Why? Did he do, or say, anything contrary to the Gospels?

Theological niceties aside, he actually believes people who report being raped by priests. That is a big plus. Pope John Paul II, who is saint now for all I know, support the systematic suppression of rape accusations, and all but accepted that the Catholic Church was a human trafficking ring.

Ken B

Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on June 04, 2019, 08:49:47 AM
Theological niceties aside, he actually believes people who report being raped by priests.
He was involved in burying the scandal while a cardinals believe.

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

It apears the WP has closed the private browsing loophole. :(