Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dr. Terence Meaden on September 13, 2010 at 4:55am

Thank you Albert in replying to my original post.

Something that haunts and horrifies me about the state of intelligence and the high-level of arrogance of god-believers is their rejection of the results of hundreds of millions of scientific experiments about the origins of the Universe, of Earth and of Life on Earth,

and who prefer instead the campside stories of Bronze Age goatherders and their fictions about Adam and Eve and talking snakes ... as to the origins of the world and mankind;

and then the epileptic desert camel-driver who declared after his rolling fits that Archangel Gabriel on his white steed had come flying through the sky to visit and advise him.

Such is the manner by which holy fictions get created. Such is the power of indoctrination into the minds of innocent children. Such is the sad state of the average adult human brain worldwide when accepting irrational and what-should-be-obvious myths as sacred truths.

Permalink Reply by Eric Burton on October 26, 2010 at 7:09am

In regards to the rejection of science and plain, elegant evidence, I can say that in my case, I was simply unaware of the amount of said evidence. Growing up in church, so many challenges to faith were batted away as a nuisance and we were given the impression that the other sides arguments were not really that convincing, and here's how you can refute that, there are missing links, etc. We were not encouraged to dig deeper.

It is a glaringly obvious weakness to not acknowledge the opposition to your view, and such deceit will raise several eyebrows, but raising the objections in a dismissive way and making the whole problem sound foolish is an easy way for people to write off what may be a very powerful objection. Likely the audience already trusts the speaker in charge, or the author of the book they are reading, so if they seem to give the other side some light recognition and then intimate that "their evidence is not really that convincing, I looked into it so you don't have to - just trust me," the objection doesn't remain a nagging issue in their mind. It's not something they have to worry about anymore - the case has been closed.

If I knew the cumulative force of the evidence against the supernatural back then, I wonder how my life would have been changed. Thank god I am an atheist! ;P

Permalink Reply by Maurisio Santiago on October 25, 2010 at 9:28pm

Well put. As atheist, we place our faith in things that have been proven, namely - science. What is facinating to me is that there are countless volumes of research that will confirm our beliefs. Some religious people will default to the bible, quran or torah as the ultimate proof of g-ds existence. To indoctrinate children into such fairy tale beliefs is a form of child abuse.

Permalink Reply by Jack Harkness on December 11, 2010 at 6:03am

A few months ago I posted this article on my “stroke” blog and also on my Alaskan husky club blog as it has some relevance to both. The reaction was swift from the South African Federation of Sleddog sports and my membership was suspended, ostensibly for insulting the person called Marcel Meridith. It was only after joining Athiestnexus last week and being exposed to the many views of people with a similar outlook that I realised that the extreme negative reaction to my words may have been caused by the second last paragraph starting “my worldview”. The worst and most persistent attacks came from Christians who were middle aged and childless with essentially dogs instead of children. Did I hit a nerve?  I’ve always been fairly private with my Atheism until I had the stroke. I’d really appreciate some opinions please?

 

A fate worse than death

These are the words of my old nemesis Marcel Meridith, head of the NSPCA in South Africa. She is an animal rightist who is against all animal / human interaction and whom I condescendingly refer to as “Merrydeath the Nut”, coined from the character “Jabba the Hut”, from the Star Wars movies. She was referring to her right to end an animals life if in her opinion the continuation of that life constituted a “fate worse than death”.

 

After a traumatic family argument this morning I find myself alone, in a black mood, contemplating the significance of these words in a more general setting. Does the pathetic circumstances that a person is left with after a stroke, or for that matter any physical or mental trauma suffered by a human being, qualify under this definition. Where is the point if it exists at all where “a fate worse than death” is reached?

 

Of course Merrydeath is only referring to animals, and does not give the animal a choice in the matter. Would a stray cat who is taken in to “care” and “humanely” murdered have taken its own life given a choice. I think not!

 

If I had died when I had the stroke many things would have changed for my immediate family. More money would have been available, at least at first, as medical bills, special equipment, etc., would have been unnecessary. Insurance would have paid and the burden of having small kids and a disabled person to look after would have been lightened. My wife would always be happy to have me as I am now than not at all, even if sometimes the burden can become intolerable. I would rather have the life I lead now than none at all and can’t imagine, even in the worst depression, a circumstance where living would be a fate worse than death.

 

My worldview does not allow me to have cosy fairy tale places where I will exist for eternity with harps or 100 virgins after I die. This one life is all there is and I have to make the best of it regardless of misfortune. My children carry a part of me into the future and that’s as good as it gets. I am just another species of animal on this planet and have no special after life privileges denied to “lesser” creatures.

 

There you go! This is done. The black cloud has receded for now. I can feel sorry for Merrydeath instead of loathing her. My meandering tirade has gone full circle without answering any deep philosophical questions, I can spend today alone being creative instead of destructive and will revisit the question of the meaning of life, (and death), at some future time when I’m in the mood again.

 

Permalink Reply by Napoleon Bonaparte on March 27, 2011 at 10:13pm

'L'athéisme n'est pas une croyance. Il s'agit de la situation par défaut dans lequel tous les innocents est né.'
La situation par défaut a toujours été la mienne. J'ai rejeté la religion à un âge précoce, malgré une éducation catholique.
En Australie, personne ne se soucie de toute façon.

http://www.atheistnexus.org/video/masochrist-punish-me

Permalink Reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on March 31, 2011 at 8:05pm

I prefer "Secular Humanist pride" because I take joy in the insight that freedom from religious mind viruses makes possible. :)

Permalink Reply by Simon Milje on April 2, 2011 at 6:21am

Hello fellow atheists!

I joined a few weeks ago and I already know that the kind of intellectual environment the Nexus seems to be granting, with its free-minded and honest discussion, will be something to greatly appreciate. The topic of atheistic pride is a good first place to set one's foot in the forums I think. (Thank you, Terence, for the invite to this group.)

Norway, my country, has to a certain extent come far as to pushing religion off the public slate(the church is in the process of being fully segregated from the state), and a great proportion of the population state themselves as non-religious. It's great to live in a country where this is the case. I am proud to be atheist because that is the position that I arrive at having to be true all information and argument considered. Being atheist means to me to be intellectually honest, it means being capable of accepting the implications of what we currently know about the world, it means not selectively choosing the view of life only on the basis of what we feel grant the most amount of gratification (actually, atheism does to me feel a lot more gratifying than any religious alternative).

In social gatherings where religion becomes a topic, which sometimes happens, but not too often as there is still a broad unspoken agreement among people of it being disrespectful, I tend to greatly become engaged trying to open up the perspective of the religious persons conversing. I feel that I truly care about the question of faith, as how I see it, it shapes and determines the motivations of a great deal of human activity and also what everything around us means to people, what it means to be kind etc.
Religion is maybe dangerous because it fuddles up the clear-view picture of a world where we can act upon our understanding of the universe, through rigorous rational and critical thinking and testing through observation. This speaks true also for the laymen, not just the people doing the science, it matters whether or not you think the world is determined by natural laws or if everything is a mush governed by an ungraspable big man, bush or octopus in an unreachable sky. Religion is to me equivalent to confusion as it undermines any honest pursuit of true knowledge that may be in conflict with the message authoritatively given by any religous figure or movement. I am proud of being an atheist because it means to care enough about life to give up hopeful ideas that ideate my own significance in the world, that I am able to find beauty in being a mass of substance that is following through a link of a long series of replicating molecules capable of mediating such complex behaviour, emotions and ponderings as the ones we are all having.

I understand the religious motive for preaching for salvation, because it is as ever-clear to them, as it is to me regarding my perception of truth, that they have the truth, that they can help people find the correct path in life if only they are given the chance. I am usually never hostile towards any religious person I debate, regardless of how fervently they may be deluded or how strongly they proclaim any fallacious argument because I only want this person to evaluate his own position, and I feel that my atheistic pride is related to this attitude in meeting the religious. Because I find so much value, and also awe-inspired humility through the privilege of having been set free from religious dogma, I make it my responsibility to help make the world consist of free critical thinkers like myself, thinking that the world will be better off in the long run.

We should be proud because we are part of a movement that means, in my opinion, so much to the future of human society. I truly believe ridding the world from most of it's superstitiously fraudulent memes will make it easier to appreciate having come to life for many. I think our pride must never turn to arrogance because I am afraid that is what will turn the people we want to listen away from us, both agnostic and theist. It's easy to get mad, frustrated or provoked when having discussions about our origins, and religion's unsatisfactory answers to them. I think we need to remember how strong an idea we are fighting and how much it means to the people we are trying to bereave it from. The global atheist movement is expropriating mental property formerly having belonged to, in the eyes of the believer, the righteous owner of the property. We should keep in mind that we are in a way always perceived as the invader, and accept that there are psychological underpinnings shaping the response to such an invasion that must be taken in consideration when we try to change someone's mind. We are the ones that need to stay cool.

I hope you enjoyed my thoughts on this topic.

Permalink Reply by Dr. Terence Meaden on April 4, 2011 at 3:59am

Thank you very much for your clear and eloquent exposition on the pride that so many atheists feel.

Permalink Reply by Alice on April 13, 2011 at 8:52pm

Religion gives us definite and simple facts about how the world was created, how we should live and who we have to thank.  It’s a perfect story.

 

Anyone whose had any life experience knows that life isn’t a perfect story.  There is no right track to be on.  There is only what works for your life.  Your strategy that works for you.  It may coincide with others strategies, but all are slightly different and attuned to our own lives.

 

I grew up in two different households – one theist and one atheist.  When I was about 6 years old I asked each parent the question: how long has the earth been around?  One told me ‘it’s a eternal cycle that repeats identically every 5,000 years’, the other told me a long story about a big bang, swirling masses of star dust and evolution with respective billions of years attached. 

 

I decided that although I loved my first parent, my second parent sounded more plausible – because there was more complexity in the explanation and there wasn’t certainty about any of it – it was proposed as a strong probability – not simple fact.

 

I preferred the long story, the complexity, the uncertainty and the proposal of a strong probability more than I liked the simplistic short story that was given as truth, right and fact with no sense of uncertainty.

Permalink Reply by SGA Atheist on April 22, 2011 at 4:23pm

I think this is an excellent post.

 

I agree that science has much to be thanked for showing us the light when it comes to the truth. I do also think that one can find oneself heading down the path to truth and atheism without even using science. There were atheists across the world in ancient times that came long before Darwin or modern science. I think philosophy and personal experience can lead someone to atheism. I think personal experience for me was a huge factor. 

 

I was a liberal Christian once who accepted a lot of the truths science provided. I would believe in the Big Bang for example, but think that God had something to do with it. I just did not bring those truths to the logical conclusion of atheism. While science allowed me to doubt God and learn to be skeptical, it was personal experience and political philosophy that sealed the deal. I guess once I decided that I should not believe in a God, I then allowed science to fill in the final gaps.

 

Permalink Reply by Cheryl on August 11, 2011 at 9:01pm

I've been an atheist since I was 15, but it's only been in the last couple of months that I decided to reach out and find like-minded individuals, (I'm 54).  I had never met another atheist, (that I knew of).  I covertly felt superior to the religious, but I still felt embarassed, not proud, of being an atheist.  A couple of years ago I saw an advertisement on a bus, Good Without God, by the Coalition of Reason, and it stuck with me.  I finally decided to look them up and get involved.  I also read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, and "Godless" by Dan Barker of the Freedom From Religion Foundation.  Now I feel proud of being an atheist and being in the same company as people like them and like the people that I'm meeting.

 

For many years I had been estranged from my mother due to her fundamentalism.  She considers herself a prophet and she has a web-based ministry.  We're back together again and I've come out as an atheist to her and to my friends.  I'm not embarassed about it any more.  I now feel that I can hold my own against her dogmatism, and she's happy just to have me back again, even if I am an atheist.   Reaching out has instilled a new sense of pride in my rationality and changed my life.

Permalink Reply by House on November 2, 2011 at 12:20am

Legislation Passed!

Pre-scientific votes shall now only be awarded a shiny blue sticker for participation.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• …
• 13
• Next ›
• Page