The best anti-religion paragraph

[The Atheist]

Atheist and anti-religious sentiment, expressed in written English is an art form at which few truly succeed. Russell, Orwell, Adams, Huxley, Twain; the list of greats who have managed it is impressive and it seems to me, with some of the genuinely intelligent and impressive writers we have in here, some could equal, or maybe even better, those of the literary giants.

It's very easy to get involved in discussions as to the whys, the proof and the argument of religion and what good (if any) it's ever done by religions, but very difficult to sum up why one needs to be atheist in just a couple of paragraphs why a 2000 year-old religion is bollocks.

I'd like to do away with all the crap and just concentrate on pure sentiment for a while.

CaveDave managed it beautifully with the following post. Feel free to join in with your own (or tell me why I shouldn't be doing it!) or post stuff copied from other great minds.

When I can get my own past, "Religion is a cop-out for cowards, bigots and misogynists" I may even have a crack myself:

Dave, take a bow.......I arrived ot the same conclusion about thirty years ago:
If the common perception is that this putative god is perfect in wisdom, vision, justice, and benevolence, and it is the source of all my attributes and abilities, including my mind, senses, curiousity, and logic, then using my "gifts" to the best of my ability is my only proper choice, whatever the conclusion.
However, many claim that the only salvation lies in denial the evidence of my sesnes and intellect and blindly accepting the "just so" fairytales of others. This is unacceptable to me.
The concept of a deity that would demand that I abdicate my cognitive abilities to recieve reward or avoid damnation, or which would capriciously conceal all direct evidence of its existence and obfuscate history with false planted evidence for a naturalistic explanation to confuse it's creatures so they were forced to choose between faith and reason, speaks to me of cruelity and evil beyond comprehention; I would sooner choose destruction than worship such filth.

Stating the above has caused Good Christian Proselytisers to physically attack me.;)

Cheers,
Dave

[Jerry_ex_machina]

Cave Dave has made the exact same argument I myself often use, despite some possible logical problems. I'm not one for the gamesmanship of dragging theism/atheism through all the paroxyms of logic many young students of philosophical discipline cut their teeth upon when they are first ensconced in the hallowed halls of higher education, a safe distance from parents, grandma, and their former Young Life minister.

Rather, at my slowly advancing age I've learned to live without the coffee stained notebook and embrace the rude obviousness of a Russell or a Nietzsche. It has been said that as we grow older we come to embrace a diety because we "feel the heat," as it were. But I haven't found that to be the case. Rather, the possibility of ANY eternity seems hopelessly naive and endlessly boring. Wether roasting in Beelzebub's own backyard Webber or strumming harps with St. Peter, the first million years or so would be tolerable, but as we approached the first billion I think my attention would start to wander. In short...I'm not cut out for the afterlife.

Rather, it's the simple fact that I'm entitled to only a few blissful decades in this life in which to swill good Scotch, caress my sweety, watch Hitchcock movies, and try to leave this earth a better place than in which I found it, that gives my brief mortality any meaning at all. Were we all truly convinced that after a century of hanging out in this briarpatch, we were entitled to trillions of aeons of infinite bliss, I'm sure our national policy would be to sit in hammocks and await the eventual fun. But, honestly, no one really behaves that way, leaving open the certain reality that few people truly believe what they claim.

For me, god is not a part of reality because I can look back at the long tide of history and see where he's come and gone. Jesus and Mohammed are new kids on the block. But what of all those who came before? No, religion solves a problem we as a human race no longer have - the question "why?" Gods, spirits, daemons, sprites, fairies...those "beings" explained a big, bold, terrifying world to a naked little ape scratching in the soil, daring to ask a question about why things a happen the way they do.

And now that naked ape, draped in rags, points wires at the stars, and has better knowledge of the answer to that age old question. But his former gods linger on the earth, still, like flies hovering above a corpse. No, there are better answers today and there is more wonder in the universe than could have ever been imagined by the likes of John entrapped on his island.

Ultimately belief or non-belief is a choice. We look at the evidence and we choose. And all the logic in the world, eventually, goes right out the window, absent any real knowledge of "the divine." But one choice, while it opens us up to a world of understanding and freedom from ancient morals and myths, also comes with the certain knowledge that some day our eyes will close and our hearts will stop and those few decades of love and laughter will flicker away. We as atheists have a tough sell...we promise freedom at a great price; the knowledge that our freedom is fleeting.

[The Atheist]

But one choice, while it opens us up to a world of understanding and freedom from ancient morals and myths, also comes with the certain knowledge that some day our eyes will close and our hearts will stop and those few decades of love and laughter will flicker away. We as atheists have a tough sell...we promise freedom at a great price; the knowledge that our freedom is fleeting.
Magnificently put. I use the hard sell line myself, but better to die on your feet than live on your knees. (thanks Peter Garrett)

Cheers

[andyandy]

Voltaire, Nietzsche and Southpark....... :)

If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. ~ Voltaire

What? Is man merely a mistake of God's? Or God merely a mistake of man? ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

Stan: Why would God let Kenny die, Chef? Why? Kenny's my Friend. Why can't God take someone else's friend?
Chef: Stan, sometime God take those closest to us, because it makes him feel better about Himself. He's a very vengeful God, Stan. He's all pissed off about something we did thousands of years ago. He just can't get over it. So he doesn't care who he takes: children, puppies, it don't matter to him, so long as it makes us sad. Do you understand?
Stan: Then why does God give us anything to start with?
Chef: Well, look at it this way: if you want to make a baby cry, first you give it a lollipop. Then, you take it away. If you never give it a lollipop to begin with, then you would have nothing to cry about. That's like God, who gives us life and love and health just so that he can tear it all away and make us cry, so he can drink the sweet milk of our tears...You see, it's our tears, Stan, that give God his great power.
Stan: I think I understand. ~ South Park

[Meadmaker]

While CaveDave's comments might well be applicable to evangelical Christianity, they aren't applicable to religion in general.

For example, his well put comment near the end of the passage

But one choice, while it opens us up to a world of understanding and freedom from ancient morals and myths, also comes with the certain knowledge that some day our eyes will close and our hearts will stop and those few decades of love and laughter will flicker away.

ETA: Oops. Wrong attribution. Sorry, Jerry.

Is extremely close to the first Noble Truth of Buddhism. (There are four Noble Truths. The reality of sickness, old age, and death, along with the suffering that accompanies them, is the first.) It was the certain knowledge of specifically that phenomenon that led Siddhartha to become the Buddha, and found a religion. Granted, it's a religion without God, and there's plenty of debate about whether it is really a religion at all, but I'm willing to bet that most atheists in these forums who cheer on CaveDave's sentiment would not spare Buddhism from their withering fire either.

Meanwhile, I wouldn't say it's a very appropriate criticism of Judaism, either. There are a few Jews who blindly follow the law without really thinking about it, and expect that will do them some good in this life or the next, but not many. I've never heard a Rabbi ask me to put aside my senses or my intellect, and outside the Orthodox community, I've never had any reason to suspect that the people I meet have done so.

Even when it comes to evangelical Chrisitianity or Orthodox Judaism, it's a pretty shallow view. I would indeed say that the Orthodox I know seem to have at least somewhat abandoned reason and evidence, and yet they live very meaningful, very fulfilling lives, within their families, their local communities, and the larger world around them. While they may abandon their reason when it comes to the existence of God, or the belief that some invisible being wrote tablets with his own finger some 3000 years ago, and then told Moses that eating shrimp would really make him mad, they also believe that this same God commands them to lead good, whole, lives. God or no God, they seem to be following His commandments to do so. Likewise some, though certainly not all, deeply religious Christians seem to be doing well because of, not in spite of, their Christianiyt.

I suppose the greatest offenders, to whom the post is most applicable, are indeed the born again Christians, among whom there are people who think that everything is meaningless except faith in Jesus and a belief in the literal truth of the Bible. For them, they spend time worrying that they might transgress one of the many, many, written or unwritten rules and be condemned to Hell, but if they just believe sufficiently earnestly, they will get to spend a blissful eternity. To them, the OP has a fair degree of applicability.

I suspect it has a lot of applicability to zealous muslims as well, but I don't know enough of their religion to say for sure.

[Hyver]

This thread makes me happy, I don't have much to add to it except that David Hume is my favorite when it comes to written anti-religious statements. I don't have a witty one line quote of his though :-(

[hgc]

This thread makes me happy, I don't have much to add to it except that David Hume is my favorite when it comes to written anti-religious statements. I don't have a witty one line quote of his though :-(
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.

The Christian religion not only was at first attended with miracles, but even at this day cannot be believed by any reasonable person without one.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.

Custom, then, is the great guide of human life.

[Ginarley]

Great stuff Dave! Nice idea for a thread too - more material for the site?

A rather hastily written shot from my perspective:

+ + + + + + + +

Religion is the ultimate in self-delusion - so ultimate that in many cases you don't even realise you are doing it. Some people start out in life indoctrinated through parents while others "discover" it through associating events to a greater power.

The reality however is that you do not need a god to explain the world - there is just as much wonder in opening your eyes and exploring the world as there ever will be in any "religious experience".

You do not need a god to find morality - what is "right" is in many cases pretty clear to most people and a differing perspective on some issues is what makes us human.

You do not need a god to give you comfort - there is much more value in learning to find comfort in difficult times by turning to friends and family.

And most of all, you certainly do not need a religious organisation to tell you that a god exists so that you can believe in it - if there really was a god I am pretty sure that nobody would doubt it.

If you want to be self-sufficient and openly honest with yourself, the last thing you will ever need is a someone else to tell you how to live your life. Freedom is the right to question. Freedom is the right to explore. Freedom is the right to make decisions and be responsible for them. Freedom is the right to be yourself, for yourself. True atheism is not about destroying religion, it is about awakening freedom.

+ + + + + + + +

hmmm - that came out more like a political speech than I intended... ahhh well it works :)

Ian.

[Dark Jaguar]

I don't have the skill a lot of people have shown in the written word. I look up new words over at dictionary.com all the time, trying to make such my vocabulary isn't completely offensive.

So essentially I don't have much to say about religion. A lot of nice sounding ideas but no reason or evidence for me to believe any of it. I don't bother worrying about my life amounting to something epic. It's enough if I can enjoy the day to day concerns of every moment.

[CapelDodger]

For me, god is not a part of reality because I can look back at the long tide of history and see where he's come and gone.
Excellent post.

What we can't see in the long tide of history is any supernatural influence. Nor do we see any supernatural influence in the vast sweep of the universe we exist in. We can see the effects of religious belief as a subjective experience, but nothing objective. For me, that's conclusive. Why are we still talking about this?

Because of philosophy, hand-maiden to futility.

[Piggy]

From The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, when Huck understands that the Bible requires him to return Jim to his rightful owner:

I felt good and all washed clean of sin for the first time I had ever felt so in my life, and I knowed I could pray now. But I didn't do it straight off, but laid the paper down and set there thinking -- thinking how good it was all this happened so, and how near I come to being lost and going to hell. And went on thinking. And got to thinking over our trip down the river; and I see Jim before me, all the time, in the day, and in the nighttime, sometimes moonlight, sometimes storms, and we a floating along, talking, and singing, and laughing. But somehow I couldn't seem to strike no places to harden me against him, but only the other kind. I'd see him standing my watch on top of his'n, stead of calling me, so I could go on sleeping; and see him how glad he was when I come back out of the fog; and when I come to him again in the swamp, up there where the feud was; and such-like times; and would always call me honey, and pet me, and do everything he could think of for me, and how good he always was; and at last I struck the time I saved him by telling the men we had small-pox aboard, and he was so grateful, and said I was the best friend old Jim ever had in the world, and the only one he's got now; and then I happened to look around, and see that paper.

It was a close place. I took it up, and held it in my hand. I was a trembling, because I'd got to decide, forever, betwixt two things, and I knowed it. I studied a minute, sort of holding my breath, and then says to myself:

"All right, then, I'll go to hell" -- and tore it up.

It was awful thoughts, and awful words, but they was said. And I let them stay said; and never thought no more about reforming. I shoved the whole thing out of my head; and said I would take up wickedness again, which was in my line, being brung up to it, and the other warn't. And for a starter, I would go to work and steal Jim out of slavery again; and if I could think up anything worse, I would do that, too; because as long as I was in, and in for good, I might as well go the whole hog.

[Meadmaker]

what is "right" is in many cases pretty clear to most people and a differing perspective on some issues is what makes us human.


Do you think so? I don't. Some of it's easy. The "thou shalt not murder" thing is pretty easy, but the "When can you use deadly force to counter a perceived threat to your family?" issue is much more difficult. And the moral aspect of, "Should I paint the basement or watch the football game this afternoon?" issue is very tricky indeed.

In my opinion, a lot of us could use a bit more moral guidance in our lives. Unfortunately, because of historical associations, many of us can't see morality separate from god-given commandments, and so when we decide that there is no god, we often decide that the answer to these taxing moral dilemmas is "There's no right answer."

I know it's something I struggle with. For the moment, in my own life, I've hit a stage where I'm willing to overlook the fact that religion happens to be false at its core (i.e. belief in Gods, ghosts, or prophets) in order to examine the wisdom in its instructions for daily life.

Your mileage may vary.

[JayT]

What the mental disease of religion teaches, it's history and actions past and present are more than enough to condemn it in the mind of an honest observer.

The reasons are numerous:

The fact that religious beliefs cannot be differentiated from a mental illness without equating it to base primitive, superstitious savagery, the roots from which it sprang.

The numerous proven false prophesies even those spoken by Jesus himself (not an atom of evidence exists that he ever lived at all).

The numerous proven scientific errors in the two contradicting laughable creation and mythical flood accounts.

Personally knowing people who died as a direct result of religious psychosis, preferring faith over medicine and suffering the typically predictable consequence.

The psychotic frenzy that believers often display in their murderous outrage over trivia that is laughable to a civilised person.

Their hatred of logic and intelligence and the conclusions it leads to.

Whoever wants to be a Christian must be intent on silencing the voice of reason.

Martin Luther (Sermons on the Gospel of St. John, Luther's Works, V.23, p.99)

Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God.

Martin Luther

To affirm that the Sun ... is at the centre of the universe and only rotates on its axis without going from east to west, is a very dangerous attitude and one calculated not only to arouse all Scholastic philosophers and theologians but also to injure our holy faith by contradicting the Scriptures.

Cardinal Bellarmine, trial of Galileo, 1615

The hatred and intolerance of religions and the things they say a person should be put to death for, such as picking up sticks on the sabbath or changing to another religion or simply not believing what they are told to believe, or else.

If, therefore, the Catholic Church also claims the right of dogmatic intolerance with regard to her teachings, it is unjust to reproach her for exercising this right...She regards dogmatic intolerance not alone as her contestable right, but also as a sacred duty...According to Romans 8:11, the secular authorities have the right to punish, especially grave crimes with death; consequently, "Heretics may be not only excommunicated, but also justly put to death."

The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911

The denial of observational reality in the extreme for thousands of years.

The earth is flat. Whoever claims it is round is an atheist deserving of punishment.

Yousef M. Ibrahim, "Muslim Edicts take on New Force"
The New York Times, February 12, 1995, p. A-14.

Their irrational hatred, the cornerstone of religion, towards anyone intelligent enough to see through the facade and dare to say so.

The fact that the higher one's intelligence, the farther from religion it leads him, as long as he's honest in his evaluation of the evidence. Intelligence never leads to religion. Ignorance, fear and superstition are the only paths to religion.

The fact that fear and terror have been the most commonly used weapons that religion uses to spread their filth over the world like a plague and with as much benefit - right up to the present day. As a result, its malignance outweighs all its visible benefits by more than 100 percent.

The fact that many of the greatest scientific advances and medicine that modern society takes for granted today were strenuously resisted and if they had won, the quality of life today would be far worse, or at best, no better than it was 2000 years ago, when disease was caused by evil spirits.

The fact that wherever religion and government are one, the cruelty and repression of people under that regime is no better off than under Josef Stalin or Hitler, in fact worse than both combined.

The hypocrisy or religion is so flagrant, it deserves to die according to its very own laws.

The fact that the disproven things the religion still believes in and teaches are such an affront to common sense as to be insane and laughable to an elementary school child.

More cruelty, death, violence and dehumanisation of the human spirit can be directly traced to the curse of religion than to any other single cause in the history of the world.

"Let us pray in this hour that nothing can divide us, and that God will help
us against the Devil! Almighty Lord, bless our fight!"

Adolf Hitler to the SA in 1930.

"I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol."

Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin is deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence, a three-star general.

referring to a 1993 battle with a Muslim warlord in Somalia, at a Jan. 2003 church event.


"Why is this man (G. W. Bush) in the White House? The majority of Americans did not vote for him. He's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this."

Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin

claiming that divine intervention put Mr. Bush in office.

I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen... I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.

G. W. Bush to James Robinson

My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.

In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.

Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942


Bush is just as devout a Christian as his brother Hitler and other 'Christian' warmongers.


The reasons could go on to fill volumes - and have over the centuries.


It's like I have maintained and observed for decades:

Religion is not a search for truth in the way many assume. It is a hunt. They are hunting it down like an animal and determined to exterminate it wherever they find it as history proves beyond all valid doubt.

Religion has had over 3500 years of testing and failed across the board. The test is over, the matter resolved. It sucks, to put it mildly.

[Meadmaker]

The fact that wherever religion and government are one, the cruelty and repression of people under that regime is no better off than under Josef Stalin or Hitler, in fact worse than both combined.

You have anyone in mind? I've read that those two guys were pretty bad.


ETA:
Religion has had over 3500 years of testing and failed across the board. The test is over, the matter resolved. It sucks, to put it mildly.

And yet, for 3500 years, and actually a great deal more, it has survived. It's a meme with some staying power. In 1789, it looked like it was pretty sick, but it survived. In 1917, it was banished from Russia, but it's back today.

From a rational perspective, it may have failed every test, but purely from an evolutionary perspective, it has succeeded, whereas rationalism doesn't seem to have done so well. Meanwhile, the one time that rationalism replaced religion as the guiding principle of the state, we got something called "The Reign of Terror". Proudly atheistic regimes haven't had a very great human rights record, either.

[The Atheist]

This thread makes me happy
Me too!

Hi Ginarley, no this is just for the sheer pleasure of reading the written-down feelings of others.

Good stuff so far!

[Rrramon]

I always liked this one by my favorite atheist, Richard Dawkins:

The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.

[SkeptiKilt]

see first sigline

[The Atheist]

The fact that fear and terror have been the most commonly used weapons that religion uses to spread their filth over the world like a plague and with as much benefit - right up to the present day. As a result, its malignance outweighs all its visible benefits by more than 100 percent.I'm with on most of your post, but this bit stands out.

[The Atheist]

see first siglineYour sig's older than my sig!

[Beerina]

"Why is this man (G. W. Bush) in the White House? The majority of Americans did not vote for him. He's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this."

Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin

claiming that divine intervention put Mr. Bush in office.

Good luck trying to prevent fraud when the coup leader is capable of warping reality, effortlessly defeating 512-bit encryption and MD5 checksums, and having you die of natural causes.

[Beerina]

And yet, for 3500 years, and actually a great deal more, [religion] has survived. It's a meme with some staying power. In 1789, it looked like it was pretty sick, but it survived. In 1917, it was banished from Russia, but it's back today.

Those who are closely watching will note that, in 1917, it was replaced with a functional work-alike, the quasi-religion of communism and heavy-handed socialism.

[Foolmewunz]

Hi, T.A. I don't know if you know Twain as well as Americans do, because he's often thought of as "that American Children's author". He was your kind of guy... irreverent and "in your face"! Several of his one liners could actually be your sig!

You might want to take a stroll through his atheism comments. Try this link.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/twain.htm

I cut and paste some my favorites (the above link promotes this).

Mark Twain [Samuel Langhorne Clemens] (1835-1910)

Man is a marvelous curiosity … he thinks he is the Creator's pet … he even believes the Creator loves him; has a passion for him; sits up nights to admire him; yes and watch over him and keep him out of trouble. He prays to him and thinks He listens. Isn't it a quaint idea?

-- Mark Twain: Satan, writing back to his friends in Heaven upon visiting Earth, showing his contempt toward this curious invention, Man, after having a few days earlier earlier been banished for a thousand years for so doing prior to investigation, in Letters from the Earth (1909?; published in 1962)

He killed all those people -- every male.
They had offended the Deity in some way. We know what the offense was, without looking; that is to say, we know it was a trifle; some small thing that no one but a god would attach any importance to. It is more than likely that a Midianite had been duplicating the conduct of one Onan, who was commanded to "go into his brother's wife" -- which he did; but instead of finishing, "he spilled it on the ground." The Lord slew Onan for that, for the lord could never abide indelicacy....
Some Midianite must have repeated Onan's act, and brought that dire disaster upon his nation. If that was not the indelicacy that outraged the feelings of the Deity, then I know what it was: some Midianite had been pissing against the wall. I am sure of it, for that was an impropriety which the Source of all Etiquette never could stand. A person could piss against a tree, he could piss on his mother, he could piss on his own breeches, and get off, but he must not piss against the wall -- that would be going quite too far. The origin of the divine prejudice against this humble crime is not stated; but we know that the prejudice was very strong -- so strong that nothing but a wholesale massacre of the people inhabiting the region where the wall was defiled could satisfy the Deity.-- Mark Twain: Satan, writing back to his friends in Heaven upon visiting Earth, this time discussing the biblical tale of "The Slaughter of the Midianites" in Numbers 31, in Letters from the Earth (1909?; published in 1962) ††


Satan hasn't a single salaried helper; the Opposition employ a million.-- Mark Twain, quoted from Barbara Schmidt, ed., "Mark Twain Quotations, Newspaper Collections, & Related Resources"


What God lacks is convictions -- stability of character. He ought to be a Presbyterian or a Catholic or something -- not try to be everything.-- Mark Twain, Notebook, quoted from Barbara Schmidt, ed., "Mark Twain Quotations, Newspaper Collections, & Related Resources"


And my favorite:
A God who could make good children as easily a bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave is angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice, and invented hell -- mouths mercy, and invented hell -- mouths Golden Rules and foregiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people, and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites his poor abused slave to worship him!
-- Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger

[JayT]

I'm with on most of your post, but this bit stands out.

If you are a true atheist, then you can probably understand my opinion better than those who are not.

I know my rant seems harsh, but that is the way it appears to me for the following reasons:

When I was a kid, many millions of years ago when the earth was young, I at first was indoctrinated into and almost fell for the brainwashing. However as time went on I stopped believing in the Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny and Santa. Eventually I stopped believing in religion for the same identical reasons. The observational evidence outweighed the invalid foundations the beliefs were based on, and being logical, I had enough evidence to finally make a decision one way or the other. Reality won with a Royal Flush.

My disbelief turned into potent hatred of religion when I saw the magnitude of the destruction it caused in the lives of family members, including a child denied medical treatment for religious reasons, and then noticed the same thing happening worldwide and subsequent research showed that this has been happening during all recorded history. Think of the lives destroyed and the grief and suffering it caused during that period.

So I admit to a strong bias against religion. Ever since I saw two family members die in slow degrees of suffering, waiting for god to cure them and rejecting real medicine until it was too late, I've developed a hatred for religion that knows no equal in hell. And that contempt was earned in full measure and daily observations of the evil things done in the name of religion fully confirmed the wisdom of that contempt, in my opinion.

Never in my life have I seen a single benefit from it except the false psychological hope that people weak with their fear of the unknown and ignorance may derive from it. But I definitely saw it kill people - millions of people over the ages. As far as I'm concerned, false hope is no better than no hope. I just prefer to honestly recognize it for what it is rather than live in a psychotic religious fantasy land that reduces the quality of life to an unacceptable degree.

In any event, its well-proven historical record, past and present, generally justifies my attitude that all the damage it has done throughout history outweighs its tangible benefits many fold. Religion has nothing to be proud of that cannot be counterbalanced to extinction by the things it should be ashamed of.

Try to consider this:
If you think it's bad now, what if religion had won all its historical wars against science, reason and human rights, imagine the horror the world would be today. Imagine being imprisoned or possibly even executed for believing the earth revolved around the sun in this day and age. Imagine living in mortal fear of your life for even having an opinion contrary to the religious dictatorship. Who benefits from this kind of oppression?

There was a time when religion nearly ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages and as the record shows, it was called that for good reason.

What would we NOT have today if they had won?

Even things like vaccines against disease were resisted on religious grounds. And that is only one of countless things that religion would have prevented if it had its way.

If it had won, the murders of all the dictators in history would look like a Sunday school picnic compared to all the people that would have died or never been born at all due to religion and its malignant cruelty.

Some people maintain that disease and pestilence do more harm than religion, but imagine how much worse those would be if religion had successfully prevented us from developing modern medicine to save as many as we could. Disease and pestilence would be far, far greater because religion would be the biggest barrier to dealing with them. Let everyone die. If that's the will of god, then so be it. Amen.

Even if the peaceful Amish ruled the world, the world today would be closer to hell than paradise. Imagine a world without electricity or any kind of motorized transportation, modern science and numerous other proven beneficial things, simply because of religion.

The obvious corollary is that even a peaceful, non-violent religion can still be a cancer to modern society and prevent any improvement in the quality of life for all.

I have noticed that many religions are still living centuries in the past in beliefs, manner and dress. Nothing ever changes for them, even for the better, unless forced to do so. And they often murderously resist such change.

Anything with roots firmly planted in fear, ignorance and superstition has no value at all in the modern world, except to historians, not to civilised society nor its advancement.

In my opinion, no religion is better than any religion.

[JayT]

Those who are closely watching will note that, in 1917, it was replaced with a functional work-alike, the quasi-religion of communism and heavy-handed socialism.

You have anyone in mind? I've read that those two guys were pretty bad.


ETA:


And yet, for 3500 years, and actually a great deal more, it has survived. It's a meme with some staying power. In 1789, it looked like it was pretty sick, but it survived. In 1917, it was banished from Russia, but it's back today.

From a rational perspective, it may have failed every test, but purely from an evolutionary perspective, it has succeeded, whereas rationalism doesn't seem to have done so well. Meanwhile, the one time that rationalism replaced religion as the guiding principle of the state, we got something called "The Reign of Terror". Proudly atheistic regimes haven't had a very great human rights record, either.


No single paragraph could possibly summarize my feelings on this subject.

I think the main reason religions survive is because people in general WANT to believe in some higher force to give their lives the fantasy of some special place in the universe.

Also, children are brainwashed from birth to harbour terror that a vengeful deity will burn them alive forever for not believing in him. That kind of brainwashing, deeply embedded in their subconscious mind, holds a grip on them nearly impossible to break.

People would have the same terror of a vengeful Easter Bunny, if brainwashed from birth to believe he would punish them for eternity for not believing in him and reinforcing this message every day of their lives by family, friends and society in general.

Irrational people have always outnumbered rational people, probably tens of thousands to one.

Many asinine superstitions have lasted thousands of years, not just religions. But religious superstitions have caused severe damage to humanity that can never be repaired.

The best way to lose faith is to closely compare various religious beliefs on the same subjects and examine their history, teachings and actions. For example, read the Islamic description of heaven and what its followers expect to find there. Then compare the biblical description of heaven and the descriptions of the afterlife of Native Americans and ancient Egyptians, the Norse views of heaven, the Romans, the ancient Greeks, etc.

I study all their holy books to compare their teachings with each other and with observational reality. Know thy enemy.

According to the bible only 144000 people will go to heaven. All of them virgin Jewish males. No women.

If reason must be destroyed, then out of the thousands of religions and even more sects, if any one of them was indeed the true religion, how would we know which one when they all demand blind belief without reason or question? Shouldn't reason be employed to determine which one to believe, if any?

Here's something funny.

Once a missionary was asked if primitive people who never ever heard of Christianity would be condemned to hell. He said no. To qualify for hell, they had to reject the scriptures. Since he's a missionary on a quest to save souls, he should strive to save as many as possible from hell. He could best serve this purpose by NOT preaching.

If they never heard of god and then reject the message the missionary brings, then none go to hell. Just by preaching the gospel, he has now condemned many who would never have otherwise had to worry about it. Good show, Mr. Preacher Man.

He could have saved them ALL from hell by NOT preaching to them at all. He's losing souls for Jesus by this!

If his concept were true, and if no missionaries existed, no people would be going to hell just because missionaries didn't exist.

Now extend this concept to the entire population of the world.

This also means that if NOBODY on earth was preached the gospel and never heard of it, the whole world would be saved from hell because they can't reject a scripture they never knew existed.

Therefore no people would go to hell if Christianity didn't exist at all!

What's wrong with this picture?

We come to conquer this land by his [the King of Spain's] command, that all may come to a knowledge of God and of His Holy Catholic Faith; and by reason of our good mission, God, the Creator of heaven and earth and of all things in them, permits this, in order that you may know Him and come out from the bestial and diabolical life that you lead.... Our Lord permitted that your pride should be brought low and that no Indian should be able to offend a Christian.

Spanish conquistador, Francisco Pizarro to the Inca emperor Atahuallpa at Peru in 1532

Science has many times proven religious beliefs wrong. When has religion ever proved science wrong on anything?

Religion, ya gotta love it.

[Ginarley]

Do you think so? I don't. Some of it's easy. The "thou shalt not murder" thing is pretty easy, but the "When can you use deadly force to counter a perceived threat to your family?" issue is much more difficult. And the moral aspect of, "Should I paint the basement or watch the football game this afternoon?" issue is very tricky indeed.

In my opinion, a lot of us could use a bit more moral guidance in our lives. Unfortunately, because of historical associations, many of us can't see morality separate from god-given commandments, and so when we decide that there is no god, we often decide that the answer to these taxing moral dilemmas is "There's no right answer."

I know it's something I struggle with. For the moment, in my own life, I've hit a stage where I'm willing to overlook the fact that religion happens to be false at its core (i.e. belief in Gods, ghosts, or prophets) in order to examine the wisdom in its instructions for daily life.

Your mileage may vary.

I agree that morality and ethical issues is very confusing and complex. However I think that people need more guidance in opening their eyes and making educated moral decisions themselves rather than benignly accepting whatever someone else says. I reject religions right to decide for me what is right or wrong because I reserve that right for myself.

The biggest problem with morality is that it is massively context dependent - there are no absolutes and an attempt to codify a realistic moral code would be a disaster - in fact that is exactly why a nations laws fill up so many millions of pages instead of just 10 bullet points.

[The Atheist]

Hi, T.A. I don't know if you know Twain as well as Americans do, because he's often thought of as "that American Children's author".No stranger to Mr. Clemens here! He'd be on my list of the top ten dead dudes I'd most like to have met. Thanks for that, always a pleasure to add anything of his.

[The Atheist]

If you are a true atheist, then you can probably understand my opinion better than those who are not... snip....In my opinion, no religion is better than any religion.
Mate, that is exactly what I meant when I started this. Honest to Bob, I had to take a few deep breaths before nominating that post with the single word, "Magnificent".

That would rate as one of the most honest, heartfelt and genuine reasons ever for people not to choose religion. I feel that my own attitude towards religion (which is pretty damned close to yours, if not identical) is the result of being atheist from so very young and accordingly seeing stuff with the eyes of a child, as we can't do now and becoming extremely cynical about it very early.

Can I use that piece, pease. As stated at the start, I wasn't here to find ideas as such, but that deserves to be read.

<<standing ovation>>

Edit: Your second post pretty much gets the ditto treatment.

[The Atheist]

The biggest problem with morality is that it is massively context dependent - there are no absolutes and an attempt to codify a realistic moral code would be a disaster - in fact that is exactly why a nations laws fill up so many millions of pages instead of just 10 bullet points.George Carlin managed to get it down to just a few words, "Be honest and respect each other." or words to that effect.

Too obvious.

[Dog Boots]

I liked this, rather recent I believe, quote from Dawkins:

"Do you really mean the only reason you try to be good is to gain God's approval and reward? That's not morality, that's just sucking up."

Other than that, I feel some of the strongest quotes are the ones going along the lines of the plethora of different, mutually exclusive, religions that exist. These are strong, because there's not much debating back and forth about them. They're not easily defeated or turned into a wash.

Some along the lines of:

"When you understand why you don't believe in other people's gods, you'll understand why I don't believe in yours."

or the Sam Harris-style: "Do you believe in Poseidon?"

[Dr Adequate]

Quotations: Religion

If you want one from me, I like my variation on Voltaire:

"If God existed, it would not be necessary to invent him."

[Meadmaker]

George Carlin managed to get it down to just a few words, "Be honest and respect each other." or words to that effect.

Too obvious.

How about "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

FWIW, I recently learned that these words were made famous by Rabbi Hillel. I had always heard them attributed to another Jewish guy, but it turns out he was copying.

[Meadmaker]

Those who are closely watching will note that, in 1917, it was replaced with a functional work-alike, the quasi-religion of communism and heavy-handed socialism.

I agree. However, I suspect it will always be so.

Your comment gave me my best answer that is more in the spirit of this thread, and anti-religion quote that I really like. Not a paragraph, just a sentence.

"Religion is the opiate of the masses."

Karl Marx.

A great deal of what Marx said was right on the (evenly distributed) money.

[The Atheist]

How about "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

FWIW, I recently learned that these words were made famous by Rabbi Hillel. I had always heard them attributed to another Jewish guy, but it turns out he was copying.I always thought the Jewish version was: "do unto others before they do you"









And before I get dumped on by 1000 posts for that, I am joking.

[SkeptiKilt]

The way I've usually seen Hillel's formulation is
What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow man: this is the whole of the Law; the rest is commentary

[JayT]

Hi, T.A. I don't know if you know Twain as well as Americans do, because he's often thought of as "that American Children's author". He was your kind of guy... irreverent and "in your face"! Several of his one liners could actually be your sig!

You might want to take a stroll through his atheism comments. Try this link.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/twain.htm

I cut and paste some my favorites (the above link promotes this).

Mark Twain [Samuel Langhorne Clemens] (1835-1910)



-- Mark Twain: Satan, writing back to his friends in Heaven upon visiting Earth, showing his contempt toward this curious invention, Man, after having a few days earlier earlier been banished for a thousand years for so doing prior to investigation, in Letters from the Earth (1909?; published in 1962)

-- Mark Twain: Satan, writing back to his friends in Heaven upon visiting Earth, this time discussing the biblical tale of "The Slaughter of the Midianites" in Numbers 31, in Letters from the Earth (1909?; published in 1962) ††


-- Mark Twain, quoted from Barbara Schmidt, ed., "Mark Twain Quotations, Newspaper Collections, & Related Resources"


-- Mark Twain, Notebook, quoted from Barbara Schmidt, ed., "Mark Twain Quotations, Newspaper Collections, & Related Resources"


And my favorite:

-- Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger



I haven't read too much of Mark Twain, but now I'm inclined to do so. We seem to think so much alike, I must be his reincarnation!
LOL

[JayT]

Mate, that is exactly what I meant when I started this. Honest to Bob, I had to take a few deep breaths before nominating that post with the single word, "Magnificent".

That would rate as one of the most honest, heartfelt and genuine reasons ever for people not to choose religion. I feel that my own attitude towards religion (which is pretty damned close to yours, if not identical) is the result of being atheist from so very young and accordingly seeing stuff with the eyes of a child, as we can't do now and becoming extremely cynical about it very early.

Can I use that piece, pease. As stated at the start, I wasn't here to find ideas as such, but that deserves to be read.

<<standing ovation>>

Edit: Your second post pretty much gets the ditto treatment.



Thanks for the nomination!

There are several excellent opinions in this thread.

I turned against religion after reaching adulthood, not when I was a kid. But even at an early age I had serious doubts.

What they tried to teach me simply didn't correlate with observational reality until something finally snapped and I suddenly saw the light. Being a rigid scientific factualist is probably what had the most influence.

I have no regrets as to my feelings on the subject.

Can I use that piece, pease. As stated at the start, I wasn't here to find ideas as such, but that deserves to be read.

You may quote me if you wish. I take full responsibility for whatever I say.

I would like to know where you intend to use it though, just out of curiosity.

:D

[The Atheist]

Thanks for the nomination!

There are several excellent opinions in this thread.

I turned against religion after reaching adulthood, not when I was a kid. But even at an early age I had serious doubts.

What they tried to teach me simply didn't correlate with observational reality until something finally snapped and I suddenly saw the light. Being a rigid scientific factualist is probably what had the most influence.

I have no regrets as to my feelings on the subject.

You may quote me if you wish.

:D

Thanks very much, I most assuredly will.

[burrahobbit]

Fantastic thread. Too bad only us atheists will ever read it.

By the way TA, I really LOVE the second quote in your sig. Might borrow it some day. Must read more about Abu'l Ala A, Ma'arri.

[The Atheist]

Fantastic thread. Too bad only us atheists will ever read it.

By the way TA, I really LOVE the second quote in your sig. Might borrow it some day. Must read more about Abu'l Ala A, Ma'arri.
Cheers, mate! You're obviously enjoying this as much as I am.

I see you're in India - get over to the cricket thread ya damned heathen!

[Meadmaker]

The way I've usually seen Hillel's formulation is

You are probably correct. I just heard it come up at dinner at the in-laws once, and have since noticed in anecdotes.

[RenaissanceBiker]

JayT, I heard that story a few times before. It goes like this.

A missionary was out spreading the good news of christianity to a remote village (sometimes it is in the tropics other times it is to eskimos). He meets a young man just outside the village and tells him about the promise of Heaven to those who believe and the horrors of Hell for sinners and those who hear the word and don't believe. The young man is distraught and he tells the missionary that his father had just passed away the previous week without ever hearing this news. He asks if his father is in Hell. The missionary sees an opportunity to convert the young man and tells him that if his father had never been told of Christ then he would go to Heaven, and that the young man could join him there if he follows the christian faith. The young man is puzzled and says, "If no one told him, then he wouldn't go to Hell?" "Yes." replies the eager missionary. The young man then asks, "Why did you tell me?"

It seems that telling people this story is one of the worst things you could do to them.

[JayT]

JayT, I heard that story a few times before. It goes like this.

A missionary was out spreading the good news of christianity to a remote village (sometimes it is in the tropics other times it is to eskimos). He meets a young man just outside the village and tells him about the promise of Heaven to those who believe and the horrors of Hell for sinners and those who hear the word and don't believe. The young man is distraught and he tells the missionary that his father had just passed away the previous week without ever hearing this news. He asks if his father is in Hell. The missionary sees an opportunity to convert the young man and tells him that if his father had never been told of Christ then he would go to Heaven, and that the young man could join him there if he follows the christian faith. The young man is puzzled and says, "If no one told him, then he wouldn't go to Hell?" "Yes." replies the eager missionary. The young man then asks, "Why did you tell me?"

It seems that telling people this story is one of the worst things you could do to them.



Yes. I've heard many variations on that story.
I also know a REAL minister who actually did say the same thing - that primitive people who never heard of Jesus will not go to hell. And some Christians do indeed believe this.

But, if what he said was true, then they could save more souls from hell by not sending missionaries out anywhere.

When you extend this concept to the whole world in general, we'd be better off without Christians at all!
Go figure!

Hey, preacher, leave us kids alone. All and all you're just another brick in the wall.

Yankee go home!
LOL

[scotth]

I have a line to nominate. I just heard it listening to an internet radio broadcast from last Friday.

I like it so much, I finally have a sig line.

[The Atheist]

I have a line to nominate. I just heard it listening to an internet radio broadcast from last Friday.

I like it so much, I finally have a sig line.Thanks for that!

Can you tell me anything about the guy who said it? He's clearly my kind of bloke - I get told off all the time (not that I care) for stating that anyone stupid enough to be religious should be aborted.

Every time someone converts to christianity the world's collective IQ falls another few points.

Cheers - I'll be using that quote myself on occasion.

[scotth]

Thanks for that!

Can you tell me anything about the guy who said it? He's clearly my kind of bloke - I get told off all the time (not that I care) for stating that anyone stupid enough to be religious should be aborted.

Every time someone converts to christianity the world's collective IQ falls another few points.

Cheers - I'll be using that quote myself on occasion.

Serious? You need to hear more about Sam Harris?

www.samharris.org (http://www.samharris.org) is a good place to start.

He wrote "The End of Faith" and his follow up to that, "Letter to a Christian Nation" just hit the shelves this week.

Pick up "The End of Faith" and Dawkin's most recent "The God Delusion". "I predict you'll enjoy 'em thoroughly!" (anyone recognize that line?)

I haven't finished "The God Delusion" yet, but so far I am very excited about it. This appears to be THE book that I will finally be able to hand to believers and really have it stand a decent chance of changing their mind.

I now have a trilogy of books that if read in order, I don't know how a believer who is intelligent enough to really understand what they've read could not be swayed. Not just to not believe, but to be positively hostile toward the idea of others continue to believe as well.

1) "Demon Haunted World" or something similar would be the start. This is primarily to prep the person's mind to be able evaluate arguements and evidence in a rational manner. If a person cannot do this basic step, they are lost.

2) "The God Delusion", provided that it finishes as strong as it has started.... if the lessons of book one have stuck, this book should positively end a persons ability to believe.

3) "The End of Faith" provides plenty of evidence for many readers to reject religious belief, but that is not the focus of the book. Its focus is really on demonstrating just how dangerous religion really is. It is more likely to be accepted, if the reader isn't still holding on to a kernal of faith, themselves. The charges are many and extremely damning.

Beside the books that are written by Sam Harris, he is interviewed at length in the "extended interview" extras of the DVD "The God Who Wasn't There". This is worth owning regardless. The 3 or 4 hours of extras being the real cream of the DVD as they are the 'footnotes' to the hour of assertion filled documentary.

Additionally, you will find that he has been interview by numerous skeptical internet radio shows. He's made the rounds recently while promoting "Letter to a Christian Nation". rationalresponders.com's 90 minutes with him is well prepared and excellent.

And then there is the op ed piece that he wrote and was published in the LA Times last week, and has been linked to on this forum in numerous locations. I'll provide one more link to it here:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-harris18sep18,0,1897169.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail


And returning to his web site, be sure to visit the inteviews section.... there are downloadable copies of numerous radio and television interviews in there. Good stuff.

I would start with the LA Times piece linked above.

[The Atheist]

Serious? You need to hear more about Sam Harris?Look, it's probably a shocking omission to admit to, but I actually hardly ever read books pertaining to atheist/religious exposition. I will check out this bloke though, as I like his style so far!

I'm more into the humour/piss-taking methods of George Carlin & Penn Jillette.

Cheers

[scotth]

Look, it's probably a shocking omission to admit to, but I actually hardly ever read books pertaining to atheist/religious exposition. I will check out this bloke though, as I like his style so far!

I'm more into the humour/piss-taking methods of George Carlin & Penn Jillette.

Cheers

Well, enjoy those, then!

Seriously though, I strongly recommend reading all three of those books I mentioned. At the very least, you get many succinct statements of ideas you may already possess, in a form that is great for the use in debate and discussion.

[CapelDodger]

I haven't read too much of Mark Twain, but now I'm inclined to do so. We seem to think so much alike, I must be his reincarnation!
LOL
I particularly recommend Roughing It, an account of his early adulthood in the New West. I re-read it recently (inspired by Deadwood) and it's as wonderful as I remembered it. Wordy - it seems 'Murricans were in those days - but such words, and such observation, and such stories. As an historical source it's priceless. And I just love the man. Always have.

[stamenflicker]

While CaveDave's comments might well be applicable to evangelical Christianity, they aren't applicable to religion in general.

I agree with totally, and I'd add that they aren't really even that applicable to most Christians that I know.

[burrahobbit]

Cheers, mate! You're obviously enjoying this as much as I am.

I see you're in India - get over to the cricket thread ya damned heathen!

WHAT cricket thread



Oh I see!

See you there

[Roboramma]

"It is something I get frequent letters about. They always start with sweet reasonableness, you know, 'We love your programs, isn't nature marvellous', and so on. But they always go on to say, 'We do wonder why it is that you don't give credit to the almighty God who created each one of these species individually.'

"My response, is that when Creationists talk about God creating every individual species as a separate act, they always instance hummingbirds, or orchids, sunflowers and beautiful things. But I tend to think instead of a parasitic worm that is boring through the eye of a boy sitting on the bank of a river in West Africa, [a worm] that's going to make him blind. And [I ask them], 'Are you telling me that the God you believe in, who you also say is an all-merciful God, who cares for each one of us individually, are you saying that God created this worm that can live in no other way than in an innocent child's eyeball? Because that doesn't seem to me to coincide with a God who's full of mercy'."
- David Attenborough

You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it
turns out that God hates all the same people you do.
-Anne Lamott, writer
(1954- )

[Roboramma]

One more, this one's my favourite:

"When I became convinced that the Universe is natural--that all the ghosts and gods are myths, there entered into my brain, into my soul, into every drop of my blood, the sense, the feeling, the joy of freedom. The walls of my prison crumbled and fell, the dungeon was flooded with light, and all the bolts, and bars, and manacles became dust. I was no longer a servant, a serf, or a slave. There was for me no master in all the wide world--not even in infinite space. I was free--free to think, to express my thoughts--free to live to my own ideal--free to live for myself and those I loved--free to use all my faculties, all my senses--free to spread imagination's wings--free to investigate, to guess and dream and hope--free to judge and determine for myself--free to reject all ignorant and cruel creeds, all the "inspired" books that savages have produced, and all the barbarous legends of the past--free from popes and priests--free from all the "called" and "set apart"--free from sanctified mistakes and holy lies--free from the fear of eternal pain--free from the winged monsters of the night--free from devils, ghosts, and gods. For the first time I was free. There were no prohibited places in all the realms of thought--no air, no space, where fancy could not spread her painted wings--no chains for my limbs--no lashes for my back--no fires for my flesh--no master's frown or threat--no following another's steps- -no need to bow, or cringe, or crawl, or utter lying words. I was free. I stood erect and fearlessly, joyously, faced all worlds.

"And then my heart was filled with gratitude, with thankfulness, and went out in love to all the heroes, the thinkers who gave their lives for the liberty of hand and brain--for the freedom of labor and thought--to those who fell in the fierce fields of war, to those who died in dungeons bound with chains--to those who proudly mounted scaffold's stairs--to those whose bones were crushed, whose flesh was scarred and torn--to those by fire consumed--to all the wise, the good, the brave of every land, whose thoughts and deeds have given freedom to the sons of men. And then I vowed to grasp the torch that they had held, and hold it high, that light might conquer darkness still."
- Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899)

[SkeptiKilt]

I haven't finished "The God Delusion" yet, but so far I am very excited about it. This appears to be THE book that I will finally be able to hand to believers and really have it stand a decent chance of changing their mind.

Scott, my only problem with TGD is the title -- if you're trying to win hearts and minds, starting off by telling people they're insane isn't the best strategy.


Mr Webster, he say
delusion
: a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary; also : the abnormal state marked by such beliefs

[scotth]

Scott, my only problem with TGD is the title -- if you're trying to win hearts and minds, starting off by telling people they're insane isn't the best strategy.


Mr Webster, he say

An interesting observation.....

Issues with the title are were specifically addressed within the book.

The word 'delusion' in my title has disquieted some phychiatrists who regard it as a technical term, not to be bandied about. Three of them wrote to me to propose a special technical for religious delusion: 'relusion'. Maybe it'll catch on. But for now I am going to stick with 'delusion', and I need to justify my use of it. The Penguin English Dictionary defines a delusion as 'a false belief or impression'. ... ... The dictionary supplied with Microsoft Word defines a delusion as 'a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence, especially as a symptom of phychiatric disorder'. The first part captures religious faith perfectly. As to whether it is a symptom of a psychiatric disorder I am inclined to follow Robert M. Pirsig, author of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, when he said, 'When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.

My opinion is that it is appropriate, however, I don't necessarily disagree with you that it might not be the best strategy from a 'PR' perspective. Honey and vinegar and all that.

[RenaissanceBiker]

"I believe that evolution is being controlled by an intelligent creator of some sort. I am compelled to believe that someone or something is guiding us, and that everything that happens to us goes according to his or her plan. That is why we have the hippopotamus, the giraffe, and the clap."

Kurt Vonnegut

[The Atheist]

"It is something I get frequent letters about. They always start with sweet reasonableness, you know, 'We love your programs, isn't nature marvellous', and so on. But they always go on to say, 'We do wonder why it is that you don't give credit to the almighty God who created each one of these species individually.'

"My response, is that when Creationists talk about God creating every individual species as a separate act, they always instance hummingbirds, or orchids, sunflowers and beautiful things. But I tend to think instead of a parasitic worm that is boring through the eye of a boy sitting on the bank of a river in West Africa, [a worm] that's going to make him blind. And [I ask them], 'Are you telling me that the God you believe in, who you also say is an all-merciful God, who cares for each one of us individually, are you saying that God created this worm that can live in no other way than in an innocent child's eyeball? Because that doesn't seem to me to coincide with a God who's full of mercy'."
- David Attenborough

Thanks very much for that - David Attenborough is one of the very, very few titled people I might actually call "Sir" David. I hadn't seen that quote before, but it's magnificent.

Cheers

[Ginarley]

Maybe too obvious too mention but its brilliant on so many levels. It's a wonderfully cutting swipe at some of the more common religious arguments, and the over zealous thinkers that pursue them :)

Douglas Adams - The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy

"Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.

"The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'

"`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'

"`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.

"`Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

[The Atheist]

Maybe too obvious too mention but its brilliant on so many levels. It's a wonderfully cutting swipe at some of the more common religious arguments, and the over zealous thinkers that pursue them :)Yeah, I can recite almost the entire first volume off by heart! I've been wondering lately whether that very passage will work against IDiots (ID proponents).