![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I would be 100% fine with people believing in God if it try to corrode science with Sunday schools and people using religion to try to say evolution doesn't exist, or that stem cell shouldn't be used because it violates their imaginary friend's law and when corrupt leaders get tax exemptions and profit off the meek because they lead a religion. When things like this occur, it is time to put a stop to religion as a protected entity. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Does it make life cheap? Do you believe your lives have been enriched through atheism? I find it interesting that anyone feels like they are in a position to judge what adds value to a human life. Is reading Aristotle any more "valuable" to a human life than reading the Bible? How, exactly, is the belief that this is your one and only life more valuable than the belief in an eternal soul? Is a three-hour session of Project 1999 more valuable than a three-hour session of Church?
It takes some serious narcissism to believe that you can answer any of those questions. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
By an odd coincidence, I am currently attempting to struggle through "Ars Rhetorica." I'm pretty impressed by Aristotle.
I've also read the Bible. I'm less impressed with that. It's so butchered from hundreds of years of willful manipulation that it's pretty much gibberish. At the same time, I'm also impressed by Linus Pauling, who said, "The best way to have a good idea is to have a lot of ideas." Personally, I think everyone should learn everything they can and think and judge for themselves. My pineapple is pretty good, too. Also, a giant turtle. |
Why should human life be measured by what good you do while you live? How is that any less arbitrary than to say life should be measured by God after you die? And there are plenty of atheists that believe life should be measured by the maximization of pleasure and enjoyment, not good. Or the pursuit of truth. Or the pursuit of beauty. There are many, many theories as to how one should value a human life, and absolutely none of them are empirically correct.
But in the case of the atheist, who's measuring, anyway? Post-death is a blank void. To the atheist, life has no "greater meaning" -- it is what it is. Meaning there is no value, except to the person living it. In which case, you choose your own meaning. And if that's the case, if you want to live a life devoted to religion, and that's what makes you happiest and most fulfilled, that's exactly what you should do. Whether or not that religion is valid. The harsh anti-religion stance doesn't even stand up to atheist logic, which is the irony in the whole matter. Atheists believe there is no meaning and everyone should choose to live life the way they see fit, not the way some religion tells them to. You can live in pursuit of truth, justice, beauty, love, pleasure -- anything but God. Doesn't seem real logical to me. Theoretically speaking, the atheist should be more tolerant of religion than anyone. |
Quote:
lets talk about why climate change isnt real |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.