Atheists in the Okanagan.

[OREZ]

And how much other suffering at the hands of the 'religious'?

Slavery, crusades for centuries, loss of property and life for countless European Jews, subjugation of ALL of the people of the New World, child abuse cases through the centuries, second class status of women, justification for wife abuse and brutal childbirth because of Eve, witch hunts and burnings, deaths to mentally ill because they were 'possessed' ....

Did I miss anything??

Well, you missed the part about religious people being persecuted by atheist regimes.

[zzontar]

Scientists who value evidence. Not the ones who believe in talking snakes and magic apples.

Ah, more insults. In your own words

I'm saying some people on either side can be *bleep*.

... so far you're the only one that seems unable to refrain from insults, so I guess you're representing your side.

[zzontar]

Scientists who value evidence. Not the ones who believe in talking snakes and magic apples.

Also, if you could provide a link as to how many scientists there are who believe the big bang happened 14 billion years ago and also believe the Earth is only a couple of thousand years old, this would be helpful.

[Healthyskeptic]

Where's the insult? It's factual. If you're a Christian you have to believe a story with a clever, talking snake and remarkable fruit pieces that impart knowledge.

[zzontar]

Where's the insult? It's factual. If you're a Christian you have to believe a story with a clever, talking snake and remarkable fruit pieces that impart knowledge.

Lol, you should get out more.

[SmokeOnTheWater]

Not sure if this is the right thread but I'm agnostic which means I ask a lot of questions like if Adam and Eve were the first 2 humans on Earth and they had 2 sons where were their sons' wives ? Who created God ? What came before God ?
And if someone says to me all you need to do is pray and have faith that's not good enough for me.
No one on Earth, no religion on Earth has the answer as to how this universe came into being.
If it was God, what came before God ? If it was a big bang, what came before the big bang ?
Therefore what is the point to argue about it. I believe in souls, in the after life, that every single one of us is connected but it's my personal beliefs and it's not affecting anyone else around me. The world would be so much better if everyone would keep their beliefs to themselves. No ?
One of my favorite quote by ( don't know ) is :
Just love each other, that is all you can do and that is all anyone really wants !

[Pat-Taporter]

. . .
Just love each other, that is all you can do and that is all anyone really wants !

And while doing so, you could try to ascribe to some code of morality.

The Moral Atheist: Living ethically without God, gods, or demons

Bill Tomlinson
Published November 2008
E-Book Time, LLC
6598 Pumpkin Road
Montgomery, AL 36108
http://www.e-booktime.com
Chapter 19 Summary: 132-137
. . .
1. Semantics is the basis for making claims about what ethical terms like right and wrong mean.
2. The concept of right action is ambiguous between three definitions.
3. The thing these three definitions have in common is they are generally regarded as admirable principles.
4. The three definitions define right action in terms of acting kindly, acting with respect, acting religiously.
5. The three definitions define wrong action in terms of acting unkindly, acting with disrespect, acting irreligiously.
6. The atheist is not committed to the third principle of each.
7. When at least one principle is applicable and no principle conflicts with it, and overall right action is well defined.
8. When two of these principles conflict, an overall wrong action is undefined.
9. When no two of these principles conflict, an overall wrong action would be the action which is unkind, disrespectful, or irreligious.
10. Kindness is the foundation of Utilitarianism.
11. Respectfulness is the foundation of ethics based upon honor, the deontological systems like Kant’s.
12. When principles conflict we have a moral dilemma.
13. When we have a moral dilemma, we can choose our action based upon what sort of person we wish to be without reference to the concept of good person.
14. Thus, there is an objective morality based upon the two principles act kindly and act respectfully, and these principles are independent of God’s existence.
15. The educated theist has another reason for believing that morality is objective without a god, because it is religiously unattractive to suppose that God’s laws are founded upon God’s whims.
16. Experience is the only thing of ultimate value.
17. Feelings, a subset of all experiences, are also the only thing of ultimate value.
18. Internal or reflective experience is a major part of positive and negative experience.
19. We have a good deal of control on our reflective experience, sometimes being able to choose how to reflect on the world.
20. A good person is one who does his best to do the right thing.
21. Even if God does not exist there are still rational reasons to want to do the right thing.
22. Reason #1: We wish to think of ourselves as good because we wish to be the sort of person we admire and like.
23. Reason #2: We also wish to think of ourselves a good because we wish to be assured that we will be good to those we love.
24. Reason #3: We wish to think of ourselves as good because we wish to be assured that we will be worthy of respect by the ones we love.
25. Virtues are character traits which would aid a person who wishes to do the right thing.
26. Vices are character traits that work against a person who wishes to do the right thing.
27. Anyone wishing to be both kind and respectful upon reflection will need to seek wisdom.
28. The theist who wishes to follow God’s law where God’s law is different from be kind and respectful will sometimes choose to not be kind or respectful and still believe he is doing the right thing.
29. To be a good person requires minimizing self-deception.
30. A necessary condition to be wise is to not be self-deceptive.
31. A major tool for self-deception is the belief in relative truth and moral relativism, since it allows a person to believe anything they want.
32. Moral relativism is an incoherent position.
33. A major tool to avoid self-deception is to try to believe things to the same degree that they are justified.
34. We do not have the moral right to believe anything we want.
35. To believe in an oracle, a god, or an artificial intelligence, when such a belief has moral consequences, without good reason to believe or merely from faith is irresponsible.
36. Killing in self-defence is a moral dilemma. It is not obligated that you kill to save your life, nor is it obligated that you refrain from killing to save your life.

[OREZ]

Where's the insult? It's factual. If you're a Christian you have to believe a story with a clever, talking snake and remarkable fruit pieces that impart knowledge.

Huh?

So you, a self described atheist, are now telling all Christians how they must interpret the Bible? That's unfortunate. At first I thought you might be different.

My mistake, evidently.

[Farmmaa]

Lol, you should get out more.

While I agree that no one can group all people into generalizations.....it does astound me just how many people do take the bible completely literally. All of it.....the story of Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, the parting of the Red Sea, virgin births, the great flood, the earth being 6,000 years old.
Fundamental Christians do believe that the bible is the word of god and is all fact.

[Pat-Taporter]

Actually, coming clean here, I think both sides are deeply mired in PPB.

http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf

And think a progressive curriculum in detecting and dealing with PPB should mandatory in schools.

[zzontar]

While I agree that no one can group all people into generalizations.....it does astound me just how many people do take the bible completely literally. All of it.....the story of Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, the parting of the Red Sea, virgin births, the great flood, the earth being 6,000 years old.
Fundamental Christians do believe that the bible is the word of god and is all fact.

It also astounds me how people who aren't fundamental Christians think:

http://www.Castanet.com/news/um-survey-find ... -together/

41 percent of Americans say people and dinosaurs co-existed

[Donald G]

Unread postby Pat-Taporter » Yesterday, 9:48 pm

14. Thus, there is an objective morality based upon the two principles act kindly and act respectfully, and these principles are independent of God’s existence.

That IMO identifies the complete lack of difference between Atheists and Christians. A belief in god is not necessary to being a good person and has no bearing on their value as a person. If morality came from a supreme being there would not be any terrorism in the world.

[Pat-Taporter]

Actually, coming clean here, I think both sides are deeply mired in PPB.

http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf

And think a progressive curriculum in detecting and dealing with PPB should mandatory in schools.

Okay, so now I’ll drop the other shoe . . ..

Because on the one hand, some children of religion are feeling the need to deal with this type of thing:

The Guardian

Losing my religion: life after extreme belief

Shahesta Shaitly

Sunday 10 April 2016 11.00 BST

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/a ... lief-faith

Fleeing the grip of a sect can be a matter of life or death. Megan Phelps-Roper, and two other former believers, reveal how they lost almost everything when they lost their faith.

Megan Phelps-Roper, 30, a former member of the Westboro Baptist Church

Deborah Feldman, 29, ex-Satmar Hasidic Jew

Imad Iddine Habib, 26, ex-Salafi Muslim . . .

While on the other hand. some children of science may come to feel a need to deal with this type of thing:

The Resources of Ambiguity: Context, Narrative, and Metaphor in Richard Dawkins's The Selfish Gene

Author: Journet, Debra

Journal: Journal of Business and Technical Communication January 2010 24: 29-59, first published on September 11, 2009

Volume: 24 Issue: 1 Page: 29

Abstract

Richard Dawkins's The Selfish Gene illustrates the power of ambiguity in scientific discourse. The rhetorical and epistemic resources that ambiguity provide are most apparent at the level of metaphor but are also central to the exigency for Dawkins's argument and to the narrative form that the argument takes. Using ratios derived from Burke's dramatistic pentad, I analyze how ambiguous language helped Dawkins to link different theoretical conceptions of the gene and consequently posit connections between genes and organisms that had not yet been empirically established. I thus demonstrate at a conceptual and textual level how ambiguity contributes to the construction of novel scientific arguments. For Dawkins, ambiguity provided a discursive space in which he could speculate on connections and developments for which he did not yet have evidence, data, or terminology. Despite his insistence that his use of figurative motive language was simply a “convenient shorthand” for more technical language, The Selfish Gene demonstrates the powerful epistemological and rhetorical role that ambiguous metaphors play in biological discourse. . . .

(If people have online access to the UBC Library then they can download a PDF of the entire article here: http://jbt.sagepub.com.ezproxy.library. ... l.pdf+html
It's only 31 pages.)

Even though I believe our society needs to acknowledge both the need for spirituality and science, my first lecture at The Sunday Assembly (links posted earlier) would not be about eliminating ambiguities in attempting to communicate religion, it would be about eliminating ambiguities in attempting to communicate science.

[Donald G]

If those who think different than we do are not harming us, why do some of us feel the need to convince them that they are wrong and we are right ??

History has proven that almost all truth is temporary.

[Farmmaa]

It also astounds me how people who aren't fundamental Christians think:

http://www.Castanet.com/news/um-survey-find ... -together/

41 percent of Americans say people and dinosaurs co-existed

I hope you are aware of the fact that they think this way because that is what fundamentalists teach and believe ??
Do a quick search on Ken Hamm and his Creation Museum...and his new Noah's Ark attraction.
Humans...modern day humans and dinosaurs together. In fact, they are on the ark.