We need to engage them and reveal just how absurd some of their arguments really are.

Absolutely!  Yet, when we do so, we’re painted as “unfair” and “intolerant” for our trouble (see Theocrat & Justice’s replies to my comparison of belief in God to belief in Santa Claus in religion_itself_is_the_fount_of_most_evil, for example).

In The God Who Wasn’t There, I’m pretty sure it’s Sam Harris who says that someone’s saying they believe in God simply stops most rational conversations; and it’s true.  More often than not, atheists are forced to just agree to disagree and “leave it alone” or risk alienating friends, family and others by pointing out the ridiculousness of basing public policy on myth and fantasy.

I agree with Sam - it’s long past time to stop respecting foolish notions and delusions.  Not only should “scientists and other public intellectuals” call these mythmongers on the carpet and expose them as deluded at best, liars at worst, but everyone who’s tired of being governed by laws based on those delusions should, too.

Y’know, I really don’t give a rat’s ass anymore if I offend people and lose friends because they can’t handle hearing that their beliefs are utterly absurd and that I don’t think everyone should have to respect them to the point that we’re willing to lie to schoolchildren by giving the “theory” of Intelligent Design equal time.  No one seems to give a shit that I’M offended by the incessant references to God, Jesus and The Almighty by our President; or that I’m ashamed at how America’s increasing religiosity, as represented by our public officials, makes us look like idiots to the rest of the world.  Worse still, the supposed “national beliefs” of America are at the root of foreign policy that hinders, rather than helps, people we supply aid to (global gag rule, anyone?).

Fuck ‘em.  The rational people have been silent long enough.  We must insist that reason and fact be more important than someone’s notion of “truth” when it comes to debate over laws that affect all people regardless of whether or not they’re down with Jesus.

There simply is no good reason to believe such things, and scientists should stop hiding their light under a bushel and make this emphatically obvious to everyone.

A--fucking--men.

Cheers BunBun

OB: ..everyone who’s tired of being governed by laws based on those delusions should, too.

OB:We must insist that reason and fact be more important than someone’s notion of “truth� when it comes to debate over laws that affect all people regardless of whether or not they’re down with Jesus.

Fair enough, although I’ve found that a lot of atheists and agnostics will assume that many laws are religiously motivated when in fact they are not.  Some examples:

Law against murder: good, whether or not you’re religious

Law requiring church attendance: bad, whether or not you’re religious

Law against abortion: good, whether or not you’re religious

No-fault divorce: bad, whether or not you’re religious

Originalist interpretation of Constitution and laws: good, whether or not you’re religious

Putting the public good ahead of indiviual rights (a.k.a. “liberalism"): bad, whether or not you’re religious

Law against murder: good, whether or not you’re religious

Why can’t we kill people and eat them....we do it to animals and plants.

Law requiring church attendance: bad, whether or not you’re religious

The way it’s going in the states I wouldn’t be surprised if some politician comes up with such a bill.

Law against abortion: good, whether or not you’re religious

What difference does it make… to you… if your neighbor is not ready to be a mother.

No-fault divorce: bad, whether or not you’re religious

I am not sure it would be any of my business to force a couple to stay together if it’s not working out.

Darryl,
Why are laws against abortion good?  That is a value judgemnt I’d like to see a justification for. Seems to me a woman should control her own body - particularly as a blastocycst has no ability to support itself and is in essence a parasite to the host.
Same goes for no-fault divorce?  Are you talking the disintigration of the classical Ozzy and Harriet Nuclear family here?
I’d also like to see some of your examples of public good over individual rights - this a typical feature of the ultra right e.g. fascism not liberalism.

from dictionary.com:

fas·cism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fshzm)
n.
often Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
Oppressive, dictatorial control.
fascism
n : a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)

lib·er·al·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lbr--lzm, lbr-)
n.
The state or quality of being liberal.
A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.
So perhaps you’d like to clarify your definitions here.

serge,

Why can’t we kill people and eat them....we do it to animals and plants.

Lets not go overboard here.  If you could kill and eat another person it would most likely mean another could kill and eat you.  You’d have no security.  Not to mention be vulnerale to various diseases transmitted through activities like this (think mad-cow on steriods - used to happen all the time in highland new guinea).
No security = no society.
No society = no dense urban populations
No dense urban populations = 5 billion dead human beings (probably a conservative estimate).

Sorry about that one, I was trying to not make sense or maybe I was trying to be funny...my other responses were serious though.

No security = no society.
No society = no dense urban populations
No dense urban populations = 5 billion dead human beings (probably a conservative estimate).

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

Consider the odds.  Not real good for any of us.

I give myself pretty good odds.  I certainly don’t have any qualms about spitting and roasting another animal, even a human one, if it means my survival.

Society is good for security, yes, and security is good for society.  However, I don’t think a requirement for survival of the species lies in dense urban populations, nor would we be wiped out by the loss of 5 billion of us.  That’s still somewhere between and 2 billion left on the planet.

If you were trying to present a logical argument, it was not sound.

Fascism is making people stand up to salute America at a baseball game and ostracizing (I probably spelt that wrong; do excuse me) people who don’t.

This really irks me. Now I remember why I don’t go to many baseball games anymore.

Say Daryl, if you were a woman would you want to be forced to have a child? I used to believe abortion was evil as well, when I was brainwashed by The Catholic Church. But when you get outside your religious microcosm, you’ll find that woman deserve a right to choose.

Skippy,
We’re getting off the thread topic, but I can’t let this one pass.

Society is good for security, yes, and security is good for society.  However, I don’t think a requirement for survival of the species lies in dense urban populations, nor would we be wiped out by the loss of 5 billion of us.  That’s still somewhere between and 2 billion left on the planet.

Strictly speaking, you’re probably right - humanity would survive - but almost certainly not as a sophisticated technical creature.
Without dense urban populations you have no manufactured goods, little education, and probably no centers of political power etc.  Once you loose the big cities our entire culture starts to come apart - unraveling like a cheap sweater.
We’d be reduced to small bands of hunter-gatherers with nothing to hunt but one another.  Or, we could end up as small farming societies that live in constant fear of the neighbors stopping by for dinner.

If we are talking a sudden collapse the die back would be horrendous - and most of us would die.  With all of the sudden competition for limited resources as society collapses in an orgy of cannibalism (can you see the horror movie plot?  humanity suddenly afflicted by a craving for long-pig) you would have to be all of these things at all of the time to survive:
1.  Well organized
2.  Well armed
3.  Ruthless as a Weasel (something I suspect comes naturally to most people when death is on the line).
4.  Part of a large group with say at least 5+ adults, preferably men or
5.  Completely on your own (anyone in a group of just 3 or four is probably in trouble- too big a footprint not enough military power)
6.  Lucky all of the time.

Nasty brutish and short.  Hobbes had it right.

What kind of life would the 2 billion or so humans left have?  How long would it take until the population declined to a level that the land could carry and how large would that population be? 100 million?  50 Million?

I have read about successful societies that have practiced cannibalism – the Aztecs are an example – but theirs was a ritualistic cannibalism.  Other humans were not a staple of the diet – only choice specimens were eaten and then as religious observances, usually adult warrior males captured in “flower warsâ€? between different Aztec city-states.

I stand by Daryl for the murder thing.
Cannibalism has been part of certain societies we know that. But My missed attempt at sarcasm had also a different goal. I am tired of all the fuss about God and what God wants. Care about yourself, about others around you INCLUDING animals and plants and you’ll be doing your God’s work....more than if you preach and defend something that is not yours.

In the end it’s all about money.

How come a shmuck like me can see that?

It’s a big mob that’s on tv everyday, in the papers everyday like a reality show that we all think sucks.

Remember “The blair witch project”...that was a movie, the actors were interviewed on tv as actors...yet weeks or months later there was news and even a documentary about the fact that the movie was real footage of the killings and a lot of people believed it. all of this because the media supported a rumor that it was the real thing.

Well the religious organisations know how to do that as if they invented it.

More preaching later !

Les, I don’t seem to be a member anymore...The other day you were saying that some info was erased or something...I don’t quite remember. Do I have to setup an other account?

I used to believe abortion was evil as well, when I was brainwashed by The Catholic Church.

As an athiest/agnostic, I have to state as a general rule, I am against abortion.

My reason: personal responsibility.  Sex is a reproductive act.  If one has sex, one should expect the possibility of pregnancy (its a natural outcome).  Thus, I say take some “non-abortion” precautions: condoms, birth control...even that “morning after pill” (I am not that ultra-conservative when it comes to early precautions).

If you refuse to take precautions...well...I say prepare to live with the results (perhaps look into someone adopting the child if you don’t want it).

Now rape and incest...well...abortion should be a choice in those cases.

Uber Gaijin,
I don’t think that many people would argue that abortion is a “good” thing.  But it is sometimes necesary.  The woman who sat my kid had three children while she was on the pill (sure she should have stopped at one and started using condoms with her husband) but the fact is that birth control does not perform at 100%.
Shit happens. 
If a woman has serial abortions then, you’re right, she is not experiencing personal responsibility.
What about those that are young and dumb - we’ve all been there - and make mistakes. Sometimes grevious mistakes are made and people should be able to take leagal remedies to those mistakes.

Another thought: once the state starts making laws to regulate abortion it takes it out of the realm of personal responsibility and turns it into legislative social control.  A woman then has no rights to make descisions about her body.  A group of lawmakers codifies the situations that abortion may or may not be legal without regard to specific circumstances.
Two 14 year old kids have sex.  Hey its fun and its great - but say they haven’t had any effective sex education - or even any at all.  Shoud they then pay such a high price for their youthful misadventure?

but the fact is that birth control does not perform at 100%.
Shit happens. 

Playing “Devil’s Advocate” here: if more people fully realized that “shit happens”, maybe they would find alternatives to casual engagement in the “horizontal mambo”

But, you are correct about state regulations and personal responsibilty.  I would rather see Roe v. Wade stand and more people be responsible for their actions than have Roe v. Wade repealed.  If that was to happen, people would not become more responsible, they would just become official criminals getting underground abortions.

As for the “youthful misadventure” statement: this is another example how America is just fucked up.  Kids are allowed to see violence on/in TV, movies, and video games, but the mention of sex or sex ed causes people to go nuts.  We need more effective sex education...it needs to come out of the closet in a mature, responsible way.

First a comment: ironicname becomes the latest in a long line of socialists on this board who can’t spell my name correctly.. TheBo$$ finally got it right once, making him about 1-for-5 lifetime.

ironicname: Why are laws against abortion good?  That is a value judgemnt I’d like to see a justification for.  Seems to me a woman should control her own body - particularly as a blastocycst has no ability to support itself and is in essence a parasite to the host.

Justification?  Ok.  Laws against abortion are good for the same reason that laws against infanticide are good.

Why stop at birth?  I have a 5-week-old baby at the moment.  I’ve carefully observed her, and she also lacks the ability to support herself.  Maybe we should just leave her on the curb for the garbage truck to pick up, since she’s just a parasite.

serge: I am tired of all the fuss about God and what God wants. Care about yourself, about others around you INCLUDING animals and plants and you’ll be doing your God’s work.

Ah, ok.  Care about each other, plants, animals, and everything else except the unborn.  Heaven forfend that we should raise a finger to protect the unborn at the expense of plants.

TheBo$$: But when you get outside your religious microcosm, you’ll find that woman deserve a right to choose.

Ah, a willing example of what I call the “pretense of the left.” People on the left would love to think that anyone who abandons their faith will immediately become hostile to traditional marriage, protecting the unborn, protecting property rights, and instead sign on to the socialist agenda.  As I’ve said, “God ain’t got nothing to do with it.” Plenty of atheists think it should be illegal to chop an unborn baby into small sections and use a vacuum to “extract” it.

ironicname: Same goes for no-fault divorce?
serge: I am not sure it would be any of my business to force a couple to stay together if it’s not working out.

Nothing can “force” a couple to stay married.  However, traditionally the partner who decided he or she didn’t want to be married anymore would bear the consequences: the faithful partener got the kids, the house, and most of the the marriage’s possessions.  That’s been upended in recent decades.  Now a woman can decide she likes her new boyfriend better and throw her husband out.  Instead of punishing her, the courts will happily hand over “her” kids, “her” house, and order the now-ex-husband to pay child support for children he gets to visit a few hours a week.

Not surprisingly, many men are deciding not to get married or have kids, since it can be a one-way ticket to a lifetime of misery and even prison.

So we should get rid of “no-fault” divorce laws which the left foisted on us over the past few decades.  If a man or woman decides they don’t want to be married anymore, call it what it is: spousal abandonment.

Ah, a willing example of what I call the “pretense of the left.�

I’m not a leftist. The only thing left about me is my left-handedness. God has everythinh to do with “it”, in regards to being hostile to marriage and other issues like the 10 Commandments in public places. Abortion is not necessarily for god. Gay haters? Godidiots! Or just ignorant people. Or, more likely, both.

Darrrryl,

First a comment: ironicname becomes the latest in a long line of socialists on this board who can’t spell my name correctly

We all occasionally hit an extraneous key, or channel the inner scotsman. 

Justification?  Ok.  Laws against abortion are good for the same reason that laws against infanticide are good.

This is no justification; this is a value statement, backed by no argument, paired with an odius example that was never put forth.
Nice technique.

Why stop at birth?  I have a 5-week-old baby at the moment.  I’ve carefully observed her, and she also lacks the ability to support herself.

Congratulations!  Having a baby is one of the absolute wonders of life.  My boy is three.  I chose to have him, as I imagine you and your wife did.

Nothing can “forceâ€? a couple to stay married.  However, traditionally the partner who decided he or she didn’t want to be married anymore would bear the consequences: the faithful partener got the kids, the house, and most of the the marriage’s possessions.  That’s been upended in recent decades.  Now a woman can decide she likes her new boyfriend better and throw her husband out.  Instead of punishing her, the courts will happily hand over “herâ€? kids, “herâ€? house, and order the now-ex-husband to pay child support for children he gets to visit a few hours a week.

Why did you get married to this woman in the first place?  I didn’t get married until I was 28 but then again I didn’t feel pressure from my community to do it earlier.
BTW: ever hear about the Scandinavian custom of trial marriage?

TheBo$$: But when you get outside your religious microcosm, you’ll find that woman deserve a right to choose.
Ah, a willing example of what I call the “pretense of the left.â€? People on the left would love to think that anyone who abandons their faith will immediately become hostile to traditional marriage, protecting the unborn, protecting property rights, and instead sign on to the socialist agenda.  As I’ve said, “God ain’t got nothing to do with it.â€? Plenty of atheists think it should be illegal to chop an unborn baby into small sections and use a vacuum to “extractâ€? it.

But this isn’t what Bo$$ was saying.  Property rights?  Who the hell mentioned those?  Oh, you did.  They are important, but how is this cogent?
Its cool and all that you call it the

“pretense of the left.�

But since it ain’t what the poster said, how much attention should we pay to you comment. I can hang all the labels you want on something but it adds nothing to the discourse if it bears no resemblance to reality.
Unrealted: Redhook changed it bottles!

It’s ridiculous to try to create laws regarding when abortion is legal and when it is not.  In the “only in cases of incest or rape” situation, do you think the legal system would be able to work fast enough to give the victim a go-ahead to have an abortion before the kid was, say about 5 years old?  All the perp has to do is say “I didn’t do it.” Pass the coat hanger.

And what about cases when the mother is carrying a baby with severe developmental problems and/or genetic mishaps?  Should the law decide how bad-off the expected child has to be?  Please.  Stay out of my personal decisions.  I’ll live with them.

Darly:
I think your problem with abortion is that you seem to think that you are killing an innocent human. This is not true. The thing that gets “killed” is not a conscious human. It is barley more than a few million bacteria. The only thing that separates it from those few million bacteria is that they are linked together and have the potential to be human. Having an abortion would be equivalent in terms of life loss to killing a tree.

You may say that the difference is in the fact that this devolping mass of cells has the chance of being human. But if that is the case then every time an egg is lost from the women(ie her period) then you would be commiting the same act of murder. Thus a woman should be incessantly pregnant. That obviously is just stupid and neither does it make sense. Abortion is not immoral. Not to mention, are you a female? If you are not then you should have absolutely no say in whether abortion is legal/illegal; no matter what your beliefes.

Cheers BunBun

Why is it so important to the atheists that other people be made to see what idiots they are for holding differing beliefs?

That is a rhetorical question. The answer is obvious. Political agenda. Both sides have one.

Must everyone need to reject God and religion for the atheists to feel more secure in their beliefs? Are etheists that fragile. Or maybe just a simple majority will be sufficient so these annoying references to Mr. Make Believe can be banished from society.

What authority figure would be used in place of God, an image of Big Brother?

The choice to believe there is no God is still a belief. A belief that is obviously just as fervant with many atheists as the belief in God is with the holy rollers.

How do the atheists teach morality to their children who have not been aborted? And, please, don’t tell me that it is the parents job to teach that. Most of us, including myself, do not have the moral authority necessary to do a proper job. Do as I say, not as I do has not proven to be a very successful model for teaching children right from wrong. All the proven science inthe world can not change that.

I know, most atheists are also moral relativists, so there really is no such thing as right and wrong. And if there were, who is to say what it is?

Religion is not the fount of evil. Men with agendas are.

You people can believe whatever you want. I dont care. But it sure is silly when ya’ll proselytize against religion just as fervantly as do those who proselytize for it.

Arrogance and condescension does not make one right. We can not all be as enlightened as you atheists.

You may say that the difference is in the fact that this devolping mass of cells has the chance of being human. But if that is the case then every time an egg is lost from the women (ie her period) then you would be commiting the same act of murder. Thus a woman should be incessantly pregnant.

I heard a guy on the radio many years ago saying something similar:  that men shouldn’t masturbate to climax because it was killing billions of potential lives.  He actually made some rather persuasive arguments and sounded like he had given it some thought (I didn’t say I agreed with him, but he wasn’t just some ranting nutjob--excuse the expression).  When asked about nocturnal emissions, he said that is a natural function over which men have no control, just as menstruation is for women.  When asked if he thought masturbation was immoral, he said no, just wasting sperm was, and that he had learned Tantric techniques so he could still have sexual pleasure without ejaculation.  He said he had contacted anti-abortion organizations in hopes of gaining their support, but they thought he was crazy (no surprise--male anti-abortionists are happy to tell women what to do with their bodies, but don’t like it when the same is done to them).

And yes, he said he got plenty of “Every sperm is sacred.” cracks. 

Not criticizing what you said BunBun, it just reminded me of the radio guy.  I am pro-choice.

sorry about this but I had to redo it.

Why is it so important to the atheists that other people be made to see what idiots they are for holding differing beliefs?

I like the way you say “idiots” as if atheists were the ones believing a fairy tale.

Must everyone need to reject God and religion for the atheists to feel more secure in their beliefs? Are etheists that fragile.

I’m sure for the atheists that it’s very much ok if you believe in God.

What authority figure would be used in place of God, an image of Big Brother?

Not everyone needs an authority figure in order to be a good person. If Christianity disapears tomorrow.....I’ll still be here after tomorrow and I’ll still teach my son the important things in life.

The choice to believe there is no God is still a belief. A belief that is obviously just as fervant with many atheists as the belief in God is with the holy rollers.

Show me God right now

How do the atheists teach morality to their children ...

If you really think that ...I would not want to be your child.

I know, most atheists are also moral relativists, so there really is no such thing as right and wrong. And if there were, who is to say what it is?

Please re-read some history about some rights and wrongs.

Religion is not the fount of evil. Men with agendas are.

And they ask for your support,your money and your vote....and you blindly give it to them.

Arrogance and condescension does not make one right. We can not all be as enlightened as you atheists.

There’s a big black cloud called “organised religion” and it’s over my head, and I don’t like it.

You have a God?....Good I’m all for that.
Your God teaches you moral values? and you want me to follow them....Prove your claims first.

I don’t see any atheists pretending anything extraordinary, Christians are…

When I say “you” I don’t mean you. Don.

Don,
Atheists are seldom joiners, but we should speak out to resist crap like this from:
http://www.abbaswatchman.com/PAGE 25 MASS MIND CONTROL AND WHY THE PEDOPHILE SECRETE SOCIETY.htm

TOTAL MIND CONTROL
ISAIAH 30:28 And his breath, as an overflowing stream, shall reach to the midst of the neck, to sift the nations with the sieve of vanity: and there shall be a bridle in the jaws of the people, causing them to err.

My name is Marquart (Mark) Ewing Phillips, born May 17, 1943 in Nashville, Tennessee.....

I am recognized internationally by mental health and law enforcement professionals as an authority on the secret science concerning external control of the mind.... I embarked on a study of the most secret technology known to man: Trauma-based mind control.... This super secret technology is an evolved system of remote human physical and psychological manipulation that has only recently been officially recognized by accredited mental health physicians for what it is, absolute mind control....

The grim reality we must all embrace is that there is, in human terms, no justice, and no revenge adequate to equal what these two, and many other victims of this U. S. Government secret weapon experienced.

Mind control, which is done simply by sending signals over the countries they want to control, is taking place everywhere in the World today ! Cuba has jammed the U.S. signals into Iran with the worlds best frequency Jammers supplied by Russia .  *NOTE* That Iran’s population has returned to normal. What I mean by this is that their country has returned to normal from their trying to over throw their government. Bush said that “if you need us we will come “ ( we = the U.S.) . Sending a call out to all nations who want democracy. You will see this happen to more nations soon ! This is real and is happening just as the Lord has said it would before he returns . Satan is blinding their minds through mind control which is sent through ultra low frequency F.M signals or micro wave signals which can target the human mind and can completely control some peoples actions and thoughts.

we are seeing on a daily basis people who are throwing their 4 year old daughters over a bridge and then jumping themselves to their deaths when every person interviewed said that this man was a model father who would never do this and again we are seeing men who caught squirrels in their yards, then drove them out of town to release them, killing 6 people in his church which every one who knew him has said he would or could never do this .  These are mind control tests which are being conducted by the gang unit police through the war on drugs in all countries that it exists in.

I found this “webshit” in about 5 minutes of searching.  It is listed here: http://www.baptisttop1000.com/
A website that lists the top 1000 “best baptist” sites.  This site was # 52 on the (unalphabetized) list.  The “baptist stop 1000” site was #8 on my google search for the word “baptist”.
These people take this wingnuttery seriously.  They have a persecution complex a mile wide and they live in a persistant state of reality denial.  Look at where I found these sites and where they posted in a google ranking.  This is not “fringe”, from its posistion this appears to be acceptable if not mainstream belief in this community. 
We (atheists) absolutely have to speak out to keep people who believe this toff out of power as a matter of self preservation.  I personally could give a shit what you believe as long as you’re crasy beliefs don’t affect me and mine.  Go believe in the spaghetti monster or as it was amusingly stated by our host here:
“Dimminutive Underwater Trolls”
I could care less - just keep it out of public policy - its got no place in it.