If Atheists were removed from America:

Originally posted by jaywill
Intifada ?

For a minute I thought you were writing [b] Infanticide:

I wonder what proportion of people going for an abortion are atheistic or feel no sense of accountability to any Supreme Being.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide[/b]

That is simply bizarre. How many times have you seen me mis-spell a word? If I had meant infanticide, I would have written infanticide. I try to not make spelling mistakes, you can google any word. I tend to get the frigging vowels wrong so I look a lot to make sure I spell right. So why would you even bring up the subject of infanticide? Because I didn't? Why didn't I bring up ritual vagina mutilation too?

The way you went from point A to point B boggles the mind.

You do know what intifada is don't you?

You and all your right wing religious set cannot just live your life as it is, you have to include thoughts about a non-existent god or at least a non-interacting god with the desperate hope this being will do you individually a favor.

Here's what I see: Your non-interacting god has to notice we are screwing up the planet and the entire ecosystem pretty badly, causing another mass extinction not seen for millions of years. Well hundreds of years if your calender is stuck on 6000.

The thing is, you christians have your heads so firmly up your collective assses you can't even see that as a problem. Oh well, I pray to my Lord, so OBVIOUSLY, everything will be ok and the fairy god mother is going to come down and go Boppety Boop and everything will be magically all better. All our boo-boos will be healed, all those extinct life forms will be magically put back in place because they were needed by the ecosystem, so the LORD said let there be Razor back frogs again, even if mankind killed them all off, I rather liked the little buggers.

Get real.

Originally posted by sonhouse
There is a simple test: Common good. No god required. BTW, that is a different statement than saying 'there is no god'.

So what if there is a god? This purported god hasn't done anything noticeably good for the human race, hasn't disciplined us for wrecking the environment. In short, if we off ourselves, there will be no regrets by this god, just the en ...[text shortened]... lt civilization, not this sniveling whiny contentious parody of civilization we have now.

Common good according to whom? If one group disagrees with another on what
should be "good" where is common ground to be found, by those with the most
power?
Kelly.

Originally posted by sonhouse
I have been saying all along that religions engage in religious wars. You cannot dispute that. Religions are there to control people. Pure and simple. 10,000 years ago people did not have intermediaries in spirituality, they were free to pursue whatever they thought was spiritual, guided by the village shaman, a form of intermediary but the shaman never tol ...[text shortened]... filthy as that.

Besides, if the first video came true, you should be happy, no divided house.

Surely you are not so naive to believe that without religion their would be no war? Or that without religion mankind would not seek to control his neighbour? Perhaps you also believe that atheism is the bastion of sanity and goodness and that science will save us?

Originally posted by jaywill
I wonder what proportion of people going for an abortion are atheistic or feel no sense of accountability to any Supreme Being.

So, lets see.
1. Atheists supposedly put less value on the life of a foetus.
2. Atheists are therefore more likely to abort.
3. You believe abortions are wrong (for religious reasons)
4. You conclude therefore that it is 'bad' to be an atheist.

Don't you see that ultimately you are saying:
A. Atheists have different values than I do.
B. My values are 'good' anybody else's are 'bad'
C. Therefore anyone holding values different from mine is 'bad'. (eg atheists).

But don't you see that the argument holds no meaning for anyone with different values from yours? And if they share your values then your assumptions must be wrong.

Originally posted by twhitehead
So, lets see.
1. Atheists supposedly put less value on the life of a foetus.
2. Atheists are therefore more likely to abort.
3. You believe abortions are wrong (for religious reasons)
4. You conclude therefore that it is 'bad' to be an atheist.

Don't you see that ultimately you are saying:
A. Atheists have different values than I do.
B. My values ...[text shortened]... values from yours? And if they share your values then your assumptions must be wrong.

Don't worry, he will rationalize it all away.

Originally posted by jaywill
Intifada ?

For a minute I thought you were writing [b] Infanticide:

I wonder what proportion of people going for an abortion are atheistic or feel no sense of accountability to any Supreme Being.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide[/b]

Hang on a second, most females I know that have had an abortion believe in God and felt that they would be doing God a disservice by bringing an unwanted child into an already troubled world.
I'm not going to debate this point, I will read your reply though.
It's jst a point of view that is strong and prevalent enough to share here , I think.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Common good according to whom? If one group disagrees with another on what
should be "good" where is common ground to be found, by those with the most
power?
Kelly.

So you are now saying the religious community is completely in agreement on what the common good is?

Originally posted by divegeester
Surely you are not so naive to believe that without religion their would be no war? Or that without religion mankind would not seek to control his neighbour? Perhaps you also believe that atheism is the bastion of sanity and goodness and that science will save us?

Where did I say that? Without religion there would be no INTIFADA, no INQUISITION, no WITCH TRIALS, a woman could walk around Salem in 1600 without fearing being called a witch. There would be no killing to convert from one religion to another.

Are you saying that kind of thing would happen anyway?

Wars start for a lot of reasons, removing religion from the equation I say would reduce the excuses for war and death.

There would have been no Crusades. Muslims would not have come out of the gate firing weapons a thousand years ago or more, etc.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Without religion there would be no ..... WITCH TRIALS, a woman could walk around Salem in 1600 without fearing being called a witch.

Are you saying that kind of thing would happen anyway?

Fear of witches and the misuse of that fear by other people happens regardless of religion - unless you consider the belief in magic religion.
The fear of witches and persecution of suspected witches has a long history in Zambia and I am sure it pre-dates Christianity.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Wars start for a lot of reasons, removing religion from the equation I say would reduce the excuses for war and death.

What cause the most conflict is differences between two segregated peoples living in close proximity. Religion is a big factor here and tends to exacerbate the situation.
However even without religion, differences of race, culture or nationality often lead to conflict.
Would you also argue that cultural differences should be got rid of? Should we all speak one language and have one culture so as to minimize the risk of war?

Originally posted by twhitehead
What cause the most conflict is differences between two segregated peoples living in close proximity. Religion is a big factor here and tends to exacerbate the situation.
However even without religion, differences of race, culture or nationality often lead to conflict.
Would you also argue that cultural differences should be got rid of? Should we all speak one language and have one culture so as to minimize the risk of war?

Of course not. There is no way to homogenize the world. To make war without religion you have to be saying I want your resources, your land, your women, something like that but not you will convert or I will kill you. You don't think that never happens today do you?

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you are now saying the religious community is completely in agreement on what the common good is?

The common good is only in dispute in a society where there are major differences between the classes . Where people can let their egos wander this way and that.

The people on a plane hurtling towards Earth (because the engines have died), have no dispute as to what the common good is.

Originally posted by twhitehead
What cause the most conflict is differences between two segregated peoples living in close proximity. Religion is a big factor here and tends to exacerbate the situation.
However even without religion, differences of race, culture or nationality often lead to conflict.
Would you also argue that cultural differences should be got rid of? Should we all speak one language and have one culture so as to minimize the risk of war?

We should all aim to speak one language (English), BUT keep our second (or first) languages and our cultures.
Similary we should recognize the borders of the world as a cultural reminder of the past. Symbolic and educational.
There is a need to unify the world about certain universal humanitarian truths so that we may trust each other in the future, despite having different backgrounds and worshipping different gods.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Common good according to whom? If one group disagrees with another on what
should be "good" where is common ground to be found, by those with the most
power?
Kelly.

Commom sense should prevail. When it does not, a simple vote should give a pretty good indication on what that society thinks (roughly) what the common good is.
Communication in short.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Commom sense should prevail. When it does not, a simple vote should give a pretty good indication on what that society thinks (roughly) what the common good is.
Communication in short.

That would defined as communications between members of the human race, not between a non-existent god through a hallucinating human and then to the rest of the community.