thought for the day.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by neophyte

while I hope for (and expect) the fallacy of religion to be eventually filed away in its proper place, next to the "earth is flat" notion, I don't see the notions of good will, justice, altruism, etc. fading as a result. Value judgements such as right and wrong are not in the exclusive purview of theists, no matter how stubbornly they have laid claim to, and perverted them. We are a thinking, self aware species, capable of (and generally predisposed to) positive, constructive modes of thought and action without the preposterous crutch of a belief system founded on an ancient fantasy.

Until such time that we, as a species, shirk off the ignorance, fear and guilt inherent in said brainwashing, we won't know how well we would or wouldn't do with it all.

While I'm hardly religious, I can see positive attributes for those who are. And once the snake kissers are discounted, I'm of the conclusion that most religious people are indeed capable of rational thought, and hardly zealots by anyone's definition.

Now I an curious as to why espouse atheism with the fervor of an Elmer Gantry. Is it not enough to draw your own conclusions and simply go your own way?

I can appreciate your disgust with the likes of Pat Robertson, but it appears to me that other than being polar opposites on religious beliefs, your tactics are much the same.

Chas

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by neophyte

while I hope for (and expect) the fallacy of religion to be eventually filed away in its proper place, next to the "earth is flat" notion, I don't see the notions of good will, justice, altruism, etc. fading as a result. Value judgements such as right and wrong are not in the exclusive purview of theists, no matter how stubbornly they have laid claim to, and perverted them. We are a thinking, self aware species, capable of (and generally predisposed to) positive, constructive modes of thought and action without the preposterous crutch of a belief system founded on an ancient fantasy.

Until such time that we, as a species, shirk off the ignorance, fear and guilt inherent in said brainwashing, we won't know how well we would or wouldn't do with it all.

Originally Posted by d-ray657

It seems like you approach your atheism with a religious fervor. I am quite aware that religious folk can be intolerant, and that horrible acts have been done in the name of religion. But there have also been a great many people of faith who have been driven by their faith to perform great services for society. I believe that tolerance for all views - religious and anti-religious is a constructive way of maintaining a society. The wall of separation between church and state is essential to maintain such tolerance. The separation requires neutrality toward any religious belief or lack thereof, but it does not stand for governmental hostility toward religion, nor should it promote such hostility.

Regards,

D-Ray

Well done, guys. A kind of agree with both of you on this, though I lean toward Neo's view. This is probably a reaction to hardcore bible-thumpin' Evangelists pushing their way too far into the public square.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Charles

While I'm hardly religious, I can see positive attributes for those who are. And once the snake kissers are discounted, I'm of the conclusion that most religious people are indeed capable of rational thought, and hardly zealots by anyone's definition.

Now I an curious as to why espouse atheism with the fervor of an Elmer Gantry. Is it not enough to draw your own conclusions and simply go your own way?

I can appreciate your disgust with the likes of Pat Robertson, but it appears to me that other than being polar opposites on religious beliefs, your tactics are much the same.

Chas

Dadgummit, Chas. Why do you have to go and say pretty much the same thing as me, but say it with so much flair? Is it your mission in life to expose pedestrian prose?

Regards,

D-Ray

[Charles]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

And I thought you were an independent thinker.

Regards,

D-Ray

I'm thinking that the three of us should get matching tattoos, so that we can be different.

Chas

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Charles

I'm thinking that the three of us should get matching tattoos, so that we can be different.

Chas

Be original! Be a Pepper!

That ad campaign always annoyed me.

Regards,

D-Ray

[neophyte]

Originally Posted by Charles

While I'm hardly religious, I can see positive attributes for those who are. And once the snake kissers are discounted, I'm of the conclusion that most religious people are indeed capable of rational thought, and hardly zealots by anyone's definition.

Now I an curious as to why espouse atheism with the fervor of an Elmer Gantry. Is it not enough to draw your own conclusions and simply go your own way?

I can appreciate your disgust with the likes of Pat Robertson, but it appears to me that other than being polar opposites on religious beliefs, your tactics are much the same.

Chas

If, in the course of stating my opinion in an unfiltered, direct manner I display disdain, it's not rooted in hostility, or, in any sense, tactical thinking. It's just how I feel about it. I do not feel it is incumbent upon me to display some insincere form of deference when speaking about religion, nor am I to be held accountable for potential defensive reactions that some might experience.

no tactics, no strategy, no ulterior motives. it's just me thinking out loud.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Dadgummit, Chas. Why do you have to go and say pretty much the same thing as me, but say it with so much flair? Is it your mission in life to expose pedestrian prose?

Regards,

D-Ray

Either I missed your post, or we were tying at the same time.

In one way, I'm a bit surprised that we came to the same conclusion, in another, not so much.

I think it's the timing that caught me off guard. And you also stated your response in a more eloquent manner.

Perhaps we should gang up on that godless freak Finn next!!!

Chas

[Charles]

Originally Posted by neophyte

If, in the course of stating my opinion in an unfiltered, direct manner I display disdain, it's not rooted in hostility, or, in any sense, tactical thinking. It's just how I feel about it. I do not feel it is incumbent upon me to display some insincere form of deference when speaking about religion, nor am I to be held accountable for potential defensive reactions that some might experience.

no tactics, no strategy, no ulterior motives. it's just me thinking out loud.

It doesn't bother me in the least, as I don't get too excited about the subject in one way or the other.

Chas

[painter]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Dadgummit, Chas. Why do you have to go and say pretty much the same thing as me, but say it with so much flair? Is it your mission in life to expose pedestrian prose?

Regards,

D-Ray

In many ways... Charles is our Samuel Clemens ( Mark Twain) of the twenty-first century.

[Zeke]

I guess I am more linear in my thought process?

If we came from nothing and will become nothing, then we are nothing.

I can't buy that or I become a true narcissist.