palimpsest,

Allow me to correct you. Science attempts to understand nature by drawing conclusions from experiment and having the results peer reviewed. It does not know or claim to know all the answers. Religion guesses because it can.

Atheists do not have a problem with people guessing about all kinds of beliefs. It does however, have a problem with religion when it attempts to impose its guessed conclusions onto the rest of the population. To do this without supplying evidence verifying their claims is arrogance to say the least.

It is highly presumptuous of you to assume, “Although I would grant them alot more credit for the good they have done than you do.” You know nothing about me and therefore that statement is only rhetorical rubbish.

I will tell you though, as a volunteer in the national organisation of the AFA I spend about 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, running it. Much of this work is counselling those negatively affected in their lives by some form of spirituality.

David

'Why do atheists continually refer to ancient wars as evidence of religious violence' asks Philo. Ulster, Kosovo, ancient?
'Atheism (unbelief) is the final scourge that would be enforced upon humanity by Dictators with no conscience', George Bush professes to be a Christian. Al-Quaeda profess to be devout Moslems.
'atheists fail to appreciate fiction, art and immagination', wrong again Philo. We can appreciate fiction, but we realise that it is indeed fiction. My children believed in Santa Claus till they grew out of it - just as I grew out of religion. Maybe you will too someday. To suggest that children are not 'normal people' unless they believe in some religious mumbo-jumbo is ridiculous. And 'what is the atheist alternative for believe' can be answered by 'we believe what we see'. When the proof is in front of us, we accept it. We could never stoop to blind faith.

Individual, '"Atheists do not have to prove anything." David, that sounds very much like "God exists !"'. It's been written before on another thread that it's not necessary to prove a negative. Your only 'proof' is an ancient book by dubious authors.

David, many a scientist has and does hold religious/spiritual beliefs. But you claim to KNOW. That's another arrogant viewpoint.

My presumptuous claim that I give religion more credit for 'good'than you is based on your belief that religion may well be the death of us all -the negatives outweigh the benefits to the point where religion threatens our existence- or some such unprovable and rhetorical statement that is opinion only. The track record of the Later Day Secularist is no better than that of religion.

There is innumerable testimony to the good that religion has done for people. Just this morning I saw on TV a young man testifying to the positive influence religion had made on his life.

I'm curious as to what form of counselling you undertake on those afflicted with spirituality. I'm imagining you performing exorcism on the possessed. Say it aint so.

palimpsest,

Please point our where I said, “I know”. Most of the Atheists I am aware of are scientific Atheists. As with all other parts of their lives, they accept propositions on the highest probability. The same as you do with the existence of fairies, flying in a plane, driving a car or eating processed food. If the highest probability was that you would die doing these things, you would not do them. When one can hide in the safety of the mind, with religion, suddenly, the rules change and highest probability is not taken into account.

About scientists: The latest survey at the National Academy of Sciences demonstrated only 7% of the respondents who answered, held any belief in a god. The general population of the USA has a 93% belief rate

The AFA has a 12 person Public Relations Team that handles inquiries from the public. As stated, some of those are in relation to the ill effects of religion in people’s lives. They cover a broad spectrum. Some are: those in relationships where one partner is religious and the other Atheist and what to do about raising children – overcoming the emotional damage of indoctrination of religion when the intellectual side is thoroughly defeated – parents concerns regarding chaplains influencing their children – living in, mainly closed rural locations where religion defines a person - young gay people, again, predominately in rural locations, seeking affirmation they are not ‘evil’ - parents concerned their child is being heavily influenced by fundamentalist religion – people from different cultures stressed by our culture, when they originate from cultures where separation of church and state is taken for granted, such as France – former priests and pastors looking for someone to talk to now they are Atheists – Atheists just wanting to know they are not alone. The list is endless but these are a few.

David

Dear David,

From reading your posts it sounds to me that your organisation does an
excellent job and helps a lot of people.

And I can understand where you're coming from. You have decided how you must live your one and only life. And you don't want anything forbidding you to be yourself.

Whereas I need to know the wonder of the Mass and the comfort of confession amid the perils of my search as I struggle to find myself.
I will follow my conscience, and demand meaning and relevance from my Church. And I will remain a Catholic

Foxy, I always enjoy your posts for their from the heart sincerity. I wish you well and hope your 'bet' pays off.

David, your posts, particularly the early ones were choc-full of assertions that carried no qualification at all. Definitely had that Colgate ring-of-confidence about them.

I've spent the majority of my life in your camp, and have stated that I regard Christianity as a cop out, and a dead end in the search for understanding, along with other religions mentioned. But life experience with prescient knowledge, remote viewing and OBE's has qualified my views.

Earlier I questioned your seemingly contradictory views re our innate attributes v's our being born as blank pages. Thanks for your answer; although I still, in my own life cannot distinguish between an 'innate quality' and my thoughts. I agree that the qualities and characteristics you describe are necessary for survival but regard them as known. I regard these 'evolutionary givens' as choices made, not some animalistic and unknown thing.

The assumption or taking on the concept of being a soul, 'in' but not of the material world does not mean I do not benefit from the sciences, only the delusional would deny gravity after all. Science is busy reducing matter to almost nothing- on the sub sub sub nuclear level they are discovering a lot more space than matter and are busy discovering what the Veda stated thousands of years ago- that thought(desire) is the mother of all invention.

Been listening to the Bob Dylan botleg series all afternoon. If there is a god surely Bob is his son?