I would like to say I am an Atheist. But as far as I know, there is no term for someone who actually hates religion. But being merely a disbeliever, that is close enough. Unfortunately, there is the condition of man to consider. There is both a practical and an altruistic aspect to Human social interaction. In the form of religion, the altruistic aspect has far too often been turned against people. I tried to fix this. I wrote a free e-book called "Our Holy Hell: The Causes, The Solutions." It can be found by just entering the title into a web browser. Though I'm not asking you to read it. Even though in my opinion it is the most important book of its kind ever written, I only mention to prove my point.
Which is that despite the validity of the things in it, remarkably few people seem to be interested. This brings me back to the condition of man. It would seem that most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else. Which is a condition that I'm sure even many Atheists are probably guilty of. I know it must feel pretty good to know that you have your crap together more than a believer. But there is a good chance that even many Atheists prefer to be lied to when it comes right down to it. There is a step beyond to be taken. Though with most people unwilling or unable to accept just rational Atheism, what chance can Humanity have.
Right as opposed to... wrong? What's the sense in it? Focus on yourself, stop worrying about other people.
As for your book, it could use an editor, or at least grammar check.
I agree Steph.
You say I should focus on myself. Which is good advice. But only to a certain degree. Because it's other people who effect my life in too many ways to go into. If an Eskimo for instance was to ask you why there are toxic chemicals showing up in his body, are you going to tell them to focus on themselves? It is good that you are an Atheist. That at least shows some sense. Unfortunately, the Human mind isn't wired to process negative information very well. Which is why I have to try so hard to try to convince people to read the book I've written instead of speaking about more important things. Such as it not being just religion that is evil, but people in general. Even Atheists. Religion is just an outlet for that evil. The trick is to identify and combat the evil in us. Despite ourselves. If you can understand what I've written here, you can understand how I have written the book I've mentioned. You should read it. That is if the wiring of your brain will allow you to.
Book I mentioned for you right isn't. When destroyed the world's goona be, seeing sense in it you'll do then. The problems of the world aren't my fault ever. So solutions ante goona be with me, but us?
I of course could have use a grammar check on my book. But I speak as I please. What do you want? Good grammar or good sense. Frank Zappa once spoke of people's "Bo Peep" diplomas. I take it you know what that implies. Also, seeing how it largely due to the educated people of the world who are to blame for its demise, I wouldn't worry about grammar if I were you. If you read the book I mentioned, you will find things much more important than grammar to worry about.
If but because no grammar good understand book people cannot, then what goood is it book? Worry won't I. ;) (sorry couldn't help myself, lol.)
You're right. Language in a vacuum are ideas verbally conceptualized. It can be seen as art in which the painter has free control over his canvas. But it could also be seen as a tool of communication, a means to an end other than itself. So if your so-called "most important book of its kind" is meant not to convince people effectively, but to stand alone isolated, for no other purpose than to exist, then I agree with you.
However, if you expect people to read it, then you had better respect your readers by affirming their intelligence, and yours, by using language to establish a bridge of the same wavelength. No one likes an author that is holier than thou, preaching at his own pace, with uncaring abandon to the readers. Such a book is not meant to be read, but to be admired. If your message is so urgent, then perhaps you should treat the book more seriously, in my opinion.
Aron, anti-theist is close.
Comparing ourselves to theists can engender feelings of superiority and frustration. I am not completely selfish and see the betterment of civilization as being significant and religion as being an impediment.
How do you mean atheists prefer to be lied to? What is the step beyond?
I could not honestly say how it felt to be right until I read enough -- Harris, Dawkins, Hitchens, and Stenger, among others -- to arrive at the conclusion that (1) either the religionists are right, or (2) atheists are right. There can be no in-between. Now, is it smug and (as O'Really would put it) pin-headed to claim one is right and the others are wrong? After all, there are so many MORE of them! No, it is not wrong. I was trained in law and picked up logic on the side. I did poorly in biology, but only because I despised memorizing all those orders, species, classes, &c. But the one thing I learned was evolution. And that is the equation that fits the religionist-vs.-atheist argument. Either the evolutionists are right and the believers are wrong, or vice-versa. Where is the factual evidence supporting belief in supernatural beings? It should come as no surprise that the religious ignore science at best and denigrate it at worst. Science and reason are the greatest threats to belief. We know. They only have wishful thinking. It's that simple.
Dear Mr. Martin,
Thank you for your reply. In the book I've mentioned, I can't claim to always be right. But I think I have done a good job at least ninety eight percent of the time. Even though the way it is constructed, it isn't very linear. It is interesting that you brought up evolution. Because I have some very interesting things to say about it in my book. (at least interesting to me) Religion is pure filth. It's true. I wonder if it had something to do with the saying, "A wolf in sheep's clothing." But as I answered "Steph" in one of these replies, even as Atheists we must learn to recognize the evil in ourselves. Even though the natural inclination is not to do so. Which probably has to do with the wiring of our brains. So what is the right way to view things and what is the wrong way. In the book I've written I tried my best to answer that question.
Aron, you did not answer my questions.
Are you saying that we need to understand the brain as it relates to indoctrination? I support that notion. Just give a brief synopsis of your views so I can decide whether it is worth reading your book.
The whole point of my book is the sheer bullshit of religion and how its diseased precepts have wormed their way into secular thought. This book isn't for you. Because in it I blast the Jewish people a new asshole. But if it makes you feel any better, I blast a bigger one into Christians. Though the Moslems are going to find things to make them want to Jihad even more too. My grammar may not be perfect. But my logic is inescapable. Do yourself a favor and avoid this book.