Are you a believer?

[Ignis Fatuus]

Justification for prejudice, hatred and violence?

Yes, but in the absence of religion it gets justified in some other way, like socialism, nationalism, racial supremacy etc. History's greatest butchers like Stalin and Mao weren't religious and none of the major wars of the last 200 years have been over religion. Even before that, it is true that religion often provided a justification for wars but the main cause was the struggle for power. Most of the serious incidents of terrorism in Europe today are down to separatists and left wing groups.

Baader-Meinhof and Brigate Rosse? Wake up! <slap! slap!>. It's the 21st Century

But you're right, even religious wars are about power, not religion, it's only the uniform, not the army.

And you're right about separatists. But that's about power too: why is it so dang difficult to separate? Isn't secession an inalienable human right? Seemingly not. When the United States of America was formed, some argued for a clause in the Constitution allowing states to secede. It was argued against that there was no need for that clause, because nothing in the Constitution said that states couldn't secede, so obviously they could. Until the Confederacy tried it, when the Union waged the then biggest war in human history to prevent it (and then wrote the winners' history of how they were the good guys).

Likewise when the EU was formed, it was suggested that there should be an explicit right of member states to secede, but this was rejected on the grounds that there was no need for that clause, because nothing said that member states couldn't secede, so obviously they could. We shall see.

[Mich the Tester]

Baader-Meinhof and Brigate Rosse? Wake up! <slap! slap!>. It's the 21st Century

No, but ETA, Real IRA and Corsican FNLC are sporadically active and quite ruthless. Add some of the neo-nazi groups in eastern Europe who haven't started bombing yet, but certainly instil fear in others with firebombings and lynchings.

[Ignis Fatuus]

No, but ETA, Real IRA and Corsican FNLC are sporadically active and quite ruthless. Add some of the neo-nazi groups in eastern Europe who haven't started bombing yet, but certainly instil fear in others with firebombings and lynchings.

As I said, separatists sure, but left-wing groups?

[doodab]

Well that´s actually quite a smart answer. You see it´s impossible to prove the non-existence of anything, so the furthest an atheist can go within the bounds of reason is to say that he considers the possibility of a god so remote that it's not worth considering. My position is exactly that. To claim with absolute certainty that there is no god or other supernatural being is untenable.

That's not an atheist, it's an agnostic.

An true atheist is just as much a man of faith as any monotheist.

[Ignis Fatuus]

That's not an atheist, it's an agnostic.

An true atheist is just as much a man of faith as any monotheist.

I disagree. Agnosticism is about god, atheism is not.

Or shall we keep "atheist" for someone who positively believes that there is no god?

Then an agnostic is someone who believes that there may be a god but he doesn't and can't know anything about god.

Someone who isn't sure whether there is a god, but thinks that there might be, and it might be possible to know, is not an agnostic but a believer suffering doubt.

And what about someone who simply does not believe in god and has no time for the idea, but who does not hold as an article of faith that there is no god? If you call him either an atheist or an agnostic, you are forcing him into a religious classification, whereas the simple fact is that he is not religious.

[Platypus]

it's hilarious that people cling to such beliefs while marvelling at the stupidity of ancient civilisations worshipping the sun and nature etc

Amen to that!

[xoggoth]

Ignis Fatuus

Not Bader meinhoff but a fairly recent EU report on terrorism shows that left wing groups are the main terrorists after separatists.

http://www.europol.europa.eu/publica.../TESAT2009.pdf

See also recent threats in Greece.

[Ignis Fatuus]

Ignis Fatuus

Not Bader meinhoff but a fairly recent EU report on terrorism shows that left wing groups are the main terrorists after separatists.

http://www.europol.europa.eu/publica.../TESAT2009.pdf

See also recent threats in Greece.

I stand corrected, insofar as I can allow such a thing to happen.


(I can believe six impossible things before breakfast, but I'll be damned if I'll admit to six mistakes before teatime).

[lilelvis2000]

I'm quite confused right now. Though I was born into a religion. I believe everyone needs a foundation of morals and ethics. As this doesn't come from the state one must get it from within or through another means. My parents did this through strict upbringing and religion. But I'm not sure I'm part of the 'right' religion and whether praying and the rituals makes any difference at all.

Looking around me I see a society in complete decay. Morals and ethics thrown out the window. Materialism is THE goal of life. Respect of others, and particularly elders is almost non-existent.

I witness my neighbour's young son. who is left to play out on the street on his own without supervision and is never chastised for his actions at all. The other week I spotted him throwing stones at my son and calling him names. When I complained to his parent I'm told "I'll have a word". This is the reality of England. 5 y/o's already into bullying, disrespect and negligent parenting.

Could this be a result of religious decline and the selfish and materialistic drive now prevalent in society? Or is it simply a result of a divided society. I don't know.

[xoggoth]

Human society is about chosing sides and I think one sometimes has to make a firm decision about what you are going to believe even when there is no good reason.

Unfortunately, if there is a conflict of opinion and the outcome affects you in practical ways, you may not have a choice. Even if you think both viewpoints are idiotic, you have to go with the one that is least objectionable.

Personally, I find Dawkins and some others fanatical, non belief is like a religion with them. I'd still back them against the religious as (so far) I don't see them interfering in the law to get their views imposed on the rest of us.