Community of Atheists

[nthn200]

Define a community of atheists that even though they don't beleive in God, all beleive in the negation of God. Wouldn't that, in itself, be a sect vulnerable to corrupt leadership if they chose to have some sort of unification?

[whoneedscience]

Define a community of atheists that even though they don't beleive in God, all beleive in the negation of God. Wouldn't that, in itself, be a sect vulnerable to corrupt leadership if they chose to have some sort of unification?
Every community is vulnerable to corrupt leadership, that's why the US was created how it is: secular.

[NihilistThug]

The US sucks, or at least the government part does.
Screw the Constitution. I never signed it.

[Tulkas]

that's why the US was created how it is: secular.
Hah! The U.S. Secular! Tell that to Bush! He'd either send you to Iraq or deny your citizenship.

[Another brick in the wall]

The US sucks, or at least the government part does.
Screw the Constitution. I never signed it.
You can always move if you don't like it here, or try to get the laws you don't like changed by voting. Government is a necessary evil, I'm afraid.

[Acromnion]

You gotta do more than vote to change laws. Not like you can vote over and over like on that ridiculous show american idol so you single opinion counts.I'm not saying dont vote, you have to get involved in the community to really make an impact, not just watch the news every 4 years to pick a fked up leader. why would bush deny you citezenship? and what would that matter, maybe you can move to iraq and he'll fight harder for your rights to be american. there are so many problems he should be focusing on here rather than over seas... blahblahblah...but thats a different debate.
But back to the topic, i think a atheist sect is better than being called an "atheist church"... google that phrase. doesnt church denote a place where ppl worship god?

[nthn200]

But back to the topic, i think a atheist sect is better than being called an "atheist church"... google that phrase. doesnt church denote a place where ppl worship god?
Is it the church or the centrality over one theory that causes the intolerance that lead to all of the wretched things perpetrated in the name of religion? Couldn't leadership rally in the other direction if the pendulum swung that way?

[Jennifer]

Is it the church or the centrality over one theory that causes the intolerance that lead to all of the wretched things perpetrated in the name of religion?
Definitely the church - its the institutionalization of the subculture, followed by a change in priorities within the group - where the survival of the group, not the underlying theories become the most important focus of the group. Beware of the hive mind.

[nthn200]

Definitely the church - its the institutionalization of the subculture, followed by a change in priorities within the group - where the survival of the group, not the underlying theories become the most important focus of the group. Beware of the hive mind.
Exactly, that's what I'm saying. If you have an atheist subculture that operates in the same way, wouldn't it be just as bad? But to play devil's advocate, how would anything get done without common theories?

[Sir Sin-O-Lot]

The US sucks, or at least the government part does.
Screw the Constitution. I never signed it.
I simply love to hear your opinions, though they are predictable.

[Another brick in the wall]

I think people should avoid banding together as much as possible. People should view themselves as individuals first, not as members of a group.

Still, cooperation is a necessary part of life. Schoepenhauer once wrote that society is like a group of porcupines huddling together on a cold day. If they get too close, they poke each other with their quills, and if they get too far away, they freeze. So, they get just close enough to avoid irritating each other.

[PanAtheist]

"Beware of the hive mind." (Jennifer)
"People should view themselves as individuals first, not as members of a group." (Another Brick)

I agree!

And if people do what excites and interests them , then helpfulness, friendliness and inter-participation , will be happenning because *that* excites everyone, and people will easily find themselves playing together, and working together for things that commonly excite them, and aids common needs, and folk shall participate in each others activities, whilst still being totally independent-headed and free (and practising 100% responsibility for every one of their actions).

"You gotta do more than vote to change laws ... you have to get involved in the community to really make an impact" (Acromnion)

I agree! And that is *the way* everyone can form political alliances, and get new people (with fresh and vital and apt approaches) elected. Way to go!!

[nthn200]

"Beware of the hive mind." (Jennifer)
"People should view themselves as individuals first, not as members of a group." (Another Brick)

I agree!

And if people do what excites and interests them , then helpfulness, friendliness and inter-participation , will be happenning because *that* excites everyone, and people will easily find themselves playing together, and working together for things that commonly excite them, and aids common needs, and folk shall participate in each others activities, whilst still being totally independent-headed and free (and practising 100% responsibility for every one of their actions).
You know, I was reading an article on the introduction of Christianity in Rome. The theology was very popular (that's why Constantine, whom I consider to be the key instrument in the first big step of the decline of Christianity as a unifying philosophy, set the state religion as Christianity and marched on into savage imperialism in the name of God) even amidst persecution from the state. The above quote really reminded me of the description of its presence among the masses. Something to think about.

[whoneedscience]

that's why the US was created how it is: secular.
Hah! The U.S. Secular! Tell that to Bush! He'd either send you to Iraq or deny your citizenship.
I never said it hasn't been going downhill ever since

[Jennifer]

I was just sitting here in the cube farm and had a great idea to raise money for our Community. We could invite people from different religious denominations to establish the superiority of their religion via the fine art of mud wrestling. We would invite Fox to broadcast - charge admission and sell ad time.

I'm telling you, this is bigger than a cheese sandwich.

[Another brick in the wall]

I had this idea of doing an experiment which would once and for all prove which religion was correct. Every religion would get a pile of wood soaked in water, and each religion would send a representative to the pile to pray to god to set it on fire. All the piles would be kept under guard in the same place to prevent cheating. Put that on Fox.

[Jennifer]

AB mine is better. Dobbson in the mud in a g string against a Lucifarian. I would pay to see that. How are you going to sell ad space for praying?

[Another brick in the wall]

I guess no one would want to watch wet sticks not burning. If I could go back in time, I would do a science fair project on that.

[Jennifer]

LOL! That would good. You could do it as a science fair project today. Then people could take breaks to buy funnel cakes and see other exhibits....damn, you people are going to get me fired. Gotta go.

[nthn200]

Subsophomoric humor...am I to take that you guys don't know how to defend yourself against the argument? Hmmm...

[Another brick in the wall]

What's wrong with my idea of testing religious claims with experiment? What argument am I supposed to be attacking?

[nthn200]

What's wrong with my idea of testing religious claims with experiment? What argument am I supposed to be attacking?
The question that the forum was originally based upon yet barely anyone decided to address. That one. But I guess that you don't have to argue it if you can't.

[Another brick in the wall]

Any organization is vulnerable to corruption. That's why I avoid them. Anything else?

[ghoulslime]

Years ago, my sister and I discussed founding a community of Atheists somewhere. The main problem with grouping Atheists is that the only common denominator they possess is a rejection of the belief in a deity. I don’t believe in Ninja Turtles, but it’s hardly a cause to found a belief system or community upon. We briefly entertained the idea of starting our own Church and Community of Rational Thinkers – complete with tax-exempt status. I even went so far as to buy 80 acres of mountain land for the purpose. If anybody is game to start an Atheist colony then Ghoulslime is certainly crazy enough to join in. ;)

[Another brick in the wall]

We could buy armor and live in a medieval fantasy land!

[whoneedscience]

We could buy armor and live in a medieval fantasy land!
And burn theists at the stake :D

[Tenspace]

I was just sitting here in the cube farm and had a great idea to raise money for our Community. We could invite people from different religious denominations to establish the superiority of their religion via the fine art of mud wrestling. We would invite Fox to broadcast - charge admission and sell ad time.

I'm telling you, this is bigger than a cheese sandwich.
Kinda like the WWE with mud? heheh. What about if the religion's leaders were the combatants. :)

"Tonight on Fox... It's the Catholics versus the Zoroastrians on Battle of the Supreme Deities!"

"Y'know, Bob, the Zoros were a shoo-in when the season opened, but with the signing of free agent Bennie, the Catholics sure have a chance at handing the Zoroastrians a three-count and a face full of mud."

Slow down, Jim! "My money's on Mazda, Goddess of Light. Tonight she'll be representing the Zoros, and with a form like that she sure can put the hurt on the Pontiff."

I'll stop now. :D

Ten

[Jennifer]

Or at the very least burn things on their lawns. Christians burn crosses. What would our group burn?

[Another brick in the wall]

No, I think we should just go to their churches and yawn loudly during the sermon. I don't really like any of these ideas. I'm content to leave them be and hope they do the same.

[ghoulslime]

Or at the very least burn things on their lawns. Christians burn crosses. What would our group burn?
Christians!

[Another brick in the wall]

Why would christians want to come to our medieval ranch?

[NihilistThug]

You can always move if you don't like it here
Which would imply that the US government has a legitimate right to any of the territorry it arbitrarily claims, which is false. The US government has no more 'right' to it's 'territory' than the Crips. In fact comparing the government to criminal gangs is an insult to criminal gangs; criminal gangs at least provide customers with products they genuinely want at great personal risk. Politicians provide nothing except money and power for themselves and the promotion of laziness and stupidity among the general populace, whilst fleecing the rest of the population.
or try to get the laws you don't like changed by voting.
There is no rational basis for Democracy/Republics or any other form of government, for that matter. Also, legislation has about as much to do with the rule of law as the highway robbery, which is only a more overt and direct form of legislation and taxation to begin with. As I have previously stated, the US government (or any other government you care to name) has no actual legitimate claim to the geographic area it claims as its dominion and no group of people, regardless of how many or few, have any legitimate claim over myself and my property or the person and property of anyone else. There is no such thing as 'society', it does not have a will, a goal, preferences or a house. 'Society' is at best a label to slap on the interactions of a general number of individuals in some specified area. At worst it's a shibboleth used to 'justify' bullshit like welfare and the FDA/FCC/FBI.
Government is a necessary evil, I'm afraid.
:rolleyes:
Like most people who make this baseless assertion, I'm sure you don't have in the least the historical or economic perspective to be able to actually justify this claim. But you've been told it by government schools, government-controlled media and government-lapdog acadamia so you just assume it's true.

http://www.lysanderspooner.org/notreason.htm
http://www.mises.org/rothbard/newliberty.asp
http://www.mises.org/rothbard/mes.asp (specifically power and market)
http://www.lewrockwell.com/edmonds/edmonds-arch.html
When you've read those, then make statements. Until then, refrain from the human tendencies to speak most on that which they understand least.

[nthn200]

I miss when Tenspace used to reply to my posts. Actual debate...I guess I ruined it with my own hubris.

[nthn200]

Any organization is vulnerable to corruption. That's why I avoid them. Anything else?
What do you call this?... & do you speak for everyone?

[Tenspace]

I miss when Tenspace used to reply to my posts. Actual debate...I guess I ruined it with my own hubris.
Did I miss something? I do let posts fall through the cracks now and then. If you have a topic... bring it on. :)

Ten

[Tenspace]

The Bumper Sticker That Would Get You Killed in the South:

"Too many Christians, not enough lions."

:D

[Tenspace]

Here's another example of posts just "falling through the cracks" -

I said (http://ravingatheist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=23005#p23005), "My point is that the bible states over 200 times that we are all (as in mankind) the Children of God. Do you refute this?"

Thomas said, " " :)

[HMS Beagle]

Define a community of atheists that even though they don't beleive in God, all beleive in the negation of God. Wouldn't that, in itself, be a sect vulnerable to corrupt leadership if they chose to have some sort of unification?
If I may answer a question with a question: Why would atheists be any less vulnerable to corrupt leadership than any other group? In other words, what is it about atheists that would exempt us from such unfortunate but natural consequences?

[Another brick in the wall]

Government is a necessary evil, I'm afraid.
:rolleyes:
Like most people who make this baseless assertion, I'm sure you don't have in the least the historical or economic perspective to be able to actually justify this claim. But you've been told it by government schools, government-controlled media and government-lapdog acadamia so you just assume it's true.
Anyone who disagrees with you is a brainwashed fool? That's an interesting and invalid line of reasoning. If there was no government, who do you think would fill the vacuum of power? Criminal gangs and warlords. I don't like taxes, but at least I have say in how they're calculated. Try doing that with the Mafia. If there was no government or laws, who would enforce contracts or deal with criminals? Without government, everyone would have to walk around armed and be prepared to defend themselves and their property from everyone else. Would you really want to live in a world like this?

[nthn200]

Define a community of atheists that even though they don't beleive in God, all beleive in the negation of God. Wouldn't that, in itself, be a sect vulnerable to corrupt leadership if they chose to have some sort of unification?
If I may answer a question with a question: Why would atheists be any less vulnerable to corrupt leadership than any other group? In other words, what is it about atheists that would exempt us from such unfortunate but natural consequences?
Yeah, that's what I think too.

[NihilistThug]

Government is a necessary evil, I'm afraid.
:rolleyes:
Like most people who make this baseless assertion, I'm sure you don't have in the least the historical or economic perspective to be able to actually justify this claim. But you've been told it by government schools, government-controlled media and government-lapdog acadamia so you just assume it's true.
Anyone who disagrees with you is a brainwashed fool? That's an interesting and invalid line of reasoning. If there was no government, who do you think would fill the vacuum of power? Criminal gangs and warlords. I don't like taxes, but at least I have say in how they're calculated. Try doing that with the Mafia. If there was no government or laws, who would enforce contracts or deal with criminals? Without government, everyone would have to walk around armed and be prepared to defend themselves and their property from everyone else. Would you really want to live in a world like this?
Like I said, read the books. Until then I refuse to debate with you. It is neither my duty nor my desire to educate people.

[Another brick in the wall]

And what makes you think something is true simply because it's written in a book? I'm willing to wager I know a good deal more about world history than you, so if your so smart, prove me wrong. You can call my assertions "baseless" if you like, but that's not the same as refuting my arguments. Please explain how a world run by criminal gangs instead of governments would be better than a republic.

[Evil_Mage_Ra]

Personally, I'd be too lazy to join an atheist church and too cheap to give my hard-earned money to an atheist "priest" (or whatever the equivalent would be). How many conversion stories have you heard that included something like "eventually I realized that church was a waste of my Sunday mornings"?

Anyway, it seems reasonable to me that if a large group of atheists got together, formed their own community, and elected leaders with special rights and priveleges, eventually that would lead to corruption. I would hope that athiests (who style themselves freethinkers, after all) would be sharp enough to catch these abuses and put a stop to them, but that may just be a pipe-dream.