User Name:


FAQ Donate Join

General Discussion

Hello everyone, i would like to apoligize for any poor grammar i might use. Now on to the main point I am an atheist but for the sake of goodness what is with all these attacks on religion? seriously people we need to show compassion. Do you all get a kick out of taking away someones beliefs that help them as a person and cause them to do good for others? I understand the problem with gay marriage they bring up but also understand they teach evolution in school, and it has been that way for a long long time GUESS WHAT! eventually and most likely pretty soon seperation of church and state is going to happen and gay marrage will be allowed also because the people in control obviously are not foolish in belief of religion. So there is no need to take away peoples beliefs, 1 reason is it helps people. 2 it helps people behave as we have evolved to act (morally)

I by no means mean to bash people but think about it, religion really isn't as evil as people put it out to be. When arguing when it comes to politics we should know to say the bible may say alcohol is fine and it may also say it is not so why should we allow that to be legal if gay marrage isn't? We should also point out that it says no sin is greater then another, so there another reason it should be allowed. Also we need to remember to point out that atheist behave morally because we have evolved that way, to many often times I see people stating "because that is what is right" which if i was a christian might scare me a little because we know people are selfish. I think it is very important to bring up altruism in animals that gives us a conscious and give examples such as how dolphins help injured animals hours on end by carrying them around on their backs and bringing them to air so they can get a breath also with that everytime such a question as why behave morally is brought up.

So here is my point once again stop making religion such a bad thing, everyone that bashes it is doing it know good and I must say christopher hitchens was an asshole look him up on youtube he wished that hell existed for one guy who was a minister or something it is funny how he would show such hate on such people sometimes i think people are jealous they just aren't foolish enough for religion. I also think we need to bring up things like string theory and other interesting things that suggest that the universe might actually cycle so sure we die but there is such a thing as re-creation. Matter is neither created or destroyed but it can be converted to energy which neither is created or destroyed but can be converted back to matter. I think those things would put a much more positive spin on atheism, and for people that say string theory isn't proven well mathmatteically it has gone many test confirming things about it and sure it doesn't mean it's true but to make such wild claims as it does and for it to not yet proven false shows we aren't just pulling that shit out of our scientist's asses. I would also like to note stephen hawkings i believe is in support of string theory.

thank you for your time

The next impact of Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) is negative. Just look at how many people have been persecuted, tortured, and murdered for the god of Abraham.

You mine as well say that all atheism is bad because of joseph stalin and other assholes were atheist. Let's be honest no MODERN christian would do such things and to suggest so is arrogant as I have seen many atheist do.

Modern Christians turn women into baby making machines (because they're certain they can't just pray to their god to make more fellow believers). Modern Christians sabotage stem cell research. Modern Christians systematically molest children and do everything to evade responsibility. Modern Christians sabotage science education. Modern Christians meddle in the families of same-sex couples. Modern Christians sabotage the Constitutional separation of church and state (1st amendment).

Please tell me the exact moment when Christianity became moral? Your distinction between modern and non-modern is nothing but a smoke screen. Why exactly is it ok to kill Jews for centuries, then suddenly stop, taking the opposite moral position? Are you saying your infinitely wise and perfect god changed his mind? If so, how do you know? When did that happen? More importantly, just because you can rationalize something now, how do you know it's right? Those previous Christians did exactly what they thought was right. How are you any different.

Atheism is the lack of a belief in god claims. Not believing in something is never a motivation to kill. Believing in a god who will give you eternal bliss (perpetual orgasm) in heaven, an infinite reward, is motivation to sell out your fellow man to get that reward.

We atheists make mistakes because we're human and we have to learn. Supposedly, Christians are motivated to follow the Author of morality who created them. What is your (Christians) excuse?

I think you have me confused for a Christian, like I said earlier I am not. Now let's be honest, we have heard many religious people say they would do whatever if god didn't exist and sure that wouldn't be everyone but we would definitely see an increase in crime. I think it is worth the sacrifice having to raise other points with Christians such as it is a sin to not be of god so why is that legal? Then we say it is a human right, along with ending separation of church and state and also using that example for abortion and gay marriage and stem cell research. Wtf ? That was hitler, not a common thing with Christians. You have got to be kidding me. Christians are not to be compared to someone going around killing Jews and what not, the only problems with them is arrogance, abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research and maybe a few others. Now we can win against them with those arguments using those examples above instead of destroying faith altogether which no doubt would have negative consequences.

Hitler was a Catholic, though the Catholics have tried very hard to distance themselves. Nazi Germany was mostly Catholic and Lutherans, so yes it was Christians killing Jews in the Holocaust. They have done so for centuries. Look up the history of Jewish persecution since about 400. Look up "On the Jews and their Lies", a famous anti-Semetic screed from Martin Luther, the founder of Protestantism. If Christians have accomplished one thing on this planet, it's kill millions of Jews. They did so because their bible says "Let his blood be on us an our children". Christians have killed hundreds of thousands because of the Bible quote "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". Too bad the author didn't know there was no such thing as witches.

I do support the free exercise clause of the US constitution. People are allowed to believe whatever nonsense they wish, but they must take responsibility for the harm their beliefs have caused and they should be aware of the horrible past of their religion and the fact that it breeds ignorance and oppression. Religious belief is not good. It's correlated with shorter lifespans, higher rates of teen pregancy, sexually transmitted diseases, teen suicide, infant mortality, and other social ills.

Interesting message. I agree that atheists put too much effort in examining the weaknesses of the arguments for religions. My objection to this is not that religion deserve better treatment. Rather, I think the weakness in this approach is that it is totally negative. We deny without saying anything constructive. The general public have a low opinion of atheists and that is to some extent our fault. We keep rehashing arguments to disprove absurd beliefs. Remember that some (most?) of the people who devoted their lives to understanding virtue and living a virtuous life did not believe in God (e.g. Socrates and Confucius). These are people who had a passion for justice and virtue. The religious might speak about "Christian virtues" or "Muslim virtues" etc. But only an atheist can have a love of virtue unconditioned by fear of hell or longing to satisfy an imaginary being. I just wish we could dwell on this when discussing our beliefs with others

I hear you out Jeff. That is why if we ever get into a conversation over atheist and morality I believe we should point out that evolution gave us morals and a conscious. I believe one reason they might have low opinion on atheism is because we do silly things like war on christmas and what not, really? is it too much to call christmas christmas? jesus christ, it's not that hard to just tag along and not be a dick with shutting down their beliefs.

The alleged war on Christmas was made up by Fox News to stir up Christians and boost ratings. The people fighting this war are the ones who boycott stores that say "happy holidays" instead foisting Christianity.

There is an active war going on against the constitutional separation of Church and State. I make no apologies for fighting for the constitution.


I hear this a lot. Personally, I think speaking out against child molestation or the sociopathology of end-times theology as a good thing.

Secular Humanism is a philosophy of life that tries to bridge this gap and give direction and a path forward. Groups promoting it include the Council for Secular Humanism and American Humanists.

I appreciate your point but what I am suggesting is that we should go about it in a principled way. There are things one should speak against and you pointed some examples. But simply condemning specific actions or beliefs is more in the line of religious preachers (of any religion) who want to whip up a crowd. Let's remember that divorcing morality and politics from religion brought us many of thing that we (and the religious) cherish: democracy, freedom of speech, objective rational study of the world (science) , tolerance . The religious want to take claim to some of these but deep down many of them are uncomfortable with these achievements. Examples of this discomfort are many from attempting to ban books and enforce prayers to battling to teach myths instead of science. We are the ones who should hold the high ground instead of having to defend ourselves against false accusations of being immoral and evil.

Im no fan of fox news but that's not exactly the truth, people were puttin up signs that heaven and hell didn't exist right next to the nativity scene, which is exactly what I am talking about. Also as far as religion and higher birth rates, well that is because the majority of the population is Christian and the majority of atheist are associated with higher salaries. Reason being... The smarter you are the more you realize and the more successful the less you need something to lean on.

I don't know of any atheists who have an issue with believers putting up their displays on private property. Many churches have them. What's at issue is religious favoritism on public property.

I never made any claims about birth rates. The survey included many countries for which Christianity is not the majority religion.

I do agree that religions often play the game of breaking your leg to sell you a crutch. For example: saying you/re a wretch that deserves to be tortured in hell, but Jesus loves you, as long as you come to church and tithe.

I don't know of any atheist neither that have problems with people putting Christmas things up, however we don't know all atheist personally, hear me out though friend, there has been many people bashing Christmas even though it is not necessary. I understand your point on religious scenes vein favored however consider this, when we see that we just say oh that is silly, but when we put up signs like is imagery and what not we are shutting down all beliefs, them stating what they believe in is not discouraging us atheists.

As for your point on the more pregnancies and other negatives associated with religion I have heard vice versa about such things and another cause for that. Could be the countries that are being considered, one example I would like to point out is Sweden, they are a majority of atheist and the crime rate is very low and there are some other positives, however it is because they have a very high standard for living. The fact it is a nation of atheism and prosperity is simply a coincidence and I will have to look into that study because from what I know there is very few studies on atheism on nations since the atheist population is very tiny except for Sweden and I want to say Japan.

Putting Christmas things up is just fine, except perhaps for public property. Remember that Christians stole much of holiday from the Romans. Ultimately, it's rooted in the winter solstice, which no religion owns. Yes, much of what they believe is silly, but when it's endorsed and promoted by the government, it's an attempt to add weight to the silliness.

The study I mentioned controlled for the standard of living. I believe that Sweden is a country that has a lot of positives because of its secular basis.

Non-believers are a larger group that Jews in the US. In many countries, non-believers are a majority.

My lazy ass finally read that study lol. Ok so I have to admit I am pleased with the studies, and now have to realise I could be wrong, however being realistic it doesn't necessarily mean secularism would also prevail in societies, now I am not saying it is not possible. There could be other factors causing the results such as that in the southern countries there isn't as much police regulation compared to a city such as areas near New York as far as homocides and suicides are concerned. I have no doubt secularism would always benefit as far as unwanted pregnacies go, however if that would only be the positive which I am again saying may or may not be but that it should be well researched more because if not that sacrifice would not be worth it. Interesting study however in the long run I wouldn't conclude secularism is most beneficial, at least yet.

To me, the choice is clear. Religious ideas are based on a broken model of the world that will always generate worse public policy than accurate knowledge of the world.

Don, would you please explain why you think the world would be better with religion excluding reasoning from the past since modern day Christians don't support slavery and violence ect?

I assume you mean better without religion.

I don't see why reasoning from the past is excluded. The past can provide great examples where religious thinking, often based on the Bible was discarded in favor of clearly better secular thinking. Slavery is a fine example. Witch killing, burning of heretics, persecution of the Jews, missionaries, the Spanish Conquest of the Americas, all have root in religious thinking that has been discarded. It all begs the question of why, if religion is so great, those things aren't continuing. Sadly, in some places they are.

How are Christians making the same mistake today? Consider the active sabotage of the teaching of evolution in US schools by religious nuts. Evolution makes their storybook tale of Adam and Eve blatantly false. If there is no fall of man (the Christian-spun point of the story in Genesis 1), then there is no reason at all for Jesus to come fix it. Jesus dying on the cross becomes sadomasochistic performance art with no purpose whatsoever. This is threatening to Christians, especially those that make their money selling it.

So what do they do? They sabotage the teaching of evolution in public schools, they try to sow doubt, they hound teachers, they meddle in the textbook publication and public acceptance.

Would the world be better off without this? Yes. More American students would get a proper education and more would become biologists or get involved with related fields. Those same people would improve the world for the rest of us with their advances and discoveries. We are poorer in this area because of religion.

Lol yea I meant without.

@ Don

Schools do not get attacked much at all anymore and none the less nothing really comes out of it. Sure it might make some students study that area more but I'm sure it wouldn't stop people from studying it for example Richard Dawkins was raised to believe and even while he was studying he did but obviously it didn't stop him.


Why does everyone say in supports slavery!? That is not a problem anymore, If you want to use that logic and can name Stalin who was a bad man but that doesn't represent what all atheist are like.


I have a list of about 1000 things here. I gave you one. I've participated in the defense of attacks here in Texas at the State Board of Education level. Most high school biology teachers are battle weary of students acting out or whining about their religious liberties being harmed when facts are presented. Add up the cost to education of all of the law suits where we've had to defend the constitution against the onslaught of ignorance. I don't consider mis-educating the children of a nation a small thing. Compare the rates of belief in creationism in the US compared to the rest of the first world. Our greatness as a nation is being sabotaged by the promotion of ignorance.

Here's another thing: Those that believe in the end-times prophesies are completely uninterested in preserving the world for future generations. James Watt, the appointed Secretary of the Interior famously said "We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at hand." Much of global warming denial comes from the religious. 1) they simply don't care and 2) they don't believe their god would allow it to happen. These attitudes are based on nonsense and they are harmful, given the large numbers of Christians in the US, who vote and act based on these attitudes.

The Bible isn't changing and it has supported slavery. Look in the commandments allegedly given by God in Exodus. If Christians choose to ignore parts of their Bible, then they are admitting their religion is wrong.

I've often called the Bible a Rorschach test for the morally challenged. They'll find various things in it to rally behind as part of the latest fad. If they move from one thing to another, it doesn't absolve them from the harm of each fad.

Sean said, "@linda Why does everyone say in supports slavery!?"

The Biblical mythical Jesus lived in a time when slavery flourished. The alleged Jesus never spoke or fought against it. Most plain old people (who are not even savior/gods) today consider slavery one of the worst crimes against humanity. The Bible does not condemn slavery. The early Church fathers, Saints, Popes, Protestant Reformers all condoned (supported) slavery.

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes." Luke 12:47

Sean said, "That is not a problem anymore," (I assume you mean slavery?)

There is plenty of exploitation of people in third world countries by capitalist who consider themselves moral. Most religions are nothing more than manipulations, under the guise of morality. All religion seeks to reap personal gain by lowering the self-esteem of the community. The Church Fathers used so-called moral issues, guilt trips and a distortion of reality in order to gain control of the masses and deliver a sheep dipped flock to the Roman Empire. Christianity was not moral it was something that was used to manipulate other human beings. The Church Fathers labeled any other religion evil to justify murdering them so that their own religion would dominate. This is still going on today - it is slavery.

Scholars know that the Bible is not based on facts, but it is often claimed that one of the major reasons for continuing to spread the Christian belief is the moral teaching of the Bible. Although, there are many examples in the Bible of God ordering people to commit immoral acts, and acts of violence against their fellow man. Most of the lessons in the Bible demonstrate setting aside common moral behavior in order to please God. God frequently orders and sanctions acts that violated His own moral law against murder. God asks Abraham to sacrifice his only son Isaac. The commandment against murder is suspended so that Abraham can prove his obedience to God. If God doesn't follow his own moral laws then "He" is immaterial for establishing a moral code of ethics. We know what is right or wrong without the (on again off again) morality of an imaginary God. Holy Books are needless as moral guides.

Under god's law all sin is equal and all sinners deserve to be condemned to burn in hell forever. This is torture which most civilized cultures denounce. Job 4:17 "Shall mortal man be more just than God? Shall a man be more pure than his maker?"

The problem with following the Christian belief or myth is that it makes it possible for people to do evil by deferring to God's sense of morality and not what is in fact moral. These kinds of beliefs give some people an excuse to harm others because of intolerance while using the "obeying God" excuse.

Some people have convinced others to perform heinous acts that they never would even conceive of doing because they were told it was God's will. God is defined to be good, no matter how lethal or heinous "His" acts. If obeying God's whim is considered a moral imperative as Christians claim - the case for an objective morality is lost.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." Stephen Weinberg

Sean said, "If you want to use that logic and can name Stalin who was a bad man but that doesn't represent what all atheist are like."

The Russian revolution of Marx never materialized - Marxism has nothing to do with the Russian communist system or China's communist system. Leon Trotsky and Lenin, the most outstanding leaders of the 1905 revolution and the October revolution in Russia, fell victim to an assassination expressly ordered by Joseph Stalin. Stalin's counterrevolutionary extermination of a long list of leaders and participants in the October revolution was completed. This is how Stalin (a Catholic) took over and became leader with an entirely different system under Stalin's communism. Hitler and Stalin were raised in the church and both aspired to be priests. Stalin was actually a Russian Orthodox Catholic. There is a National Geographic with interviews that were done with Russian orthodox priests who stated that Stalin was in fact a member of the Russian Orthodoxy. Marxism is not communism. Marx was anti-religion he said, religion was opium for the masses." Many Stalin communists were involved with the Russian orthodox Church that has been thriving in Russia from that time to the present day. Under Stalin communism was a bastardized version of Marx's ideas that were adapted to capitalist ideas in order to maintain trade, and internal commerce. All other existing states of communism since were Stalinist, except China, which originally was Stalinist and adapted over time. Mousolini was a Roman Catholic. Moa and Pol Pot were not raised atheist either. Hitler in Mein Kampf states his belief in God numerous times, including this statement: "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

People trying use tyrants to prove something about Christianity will find that the number of tyrants in Christianity far outnumbers anything else.

James Madison, the primary architect of the Constitution, "Memorial and Remonstrance" 1785 wrote, "What influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the Civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny: in no instance have they been seen the guardians of the liberties of the people"

Have a freaking sh*t of a nice life!

I believe I can justify why some religions are inherently immoral. This is a stronger statement than the examples I've given.

Specifically, I'm talking about religions where people feel they can trade with a powerful god. This includes Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. What would a person trade for? Favors. Blessings. Not being punished. Eternal bliss.

What would such a person trade? He might trade his behaviors, such as giving to charity, saying the rosary. He might feel that he has to rid the world of people who are not also submitting to his god's plan.

As the Bible says, you can't serve two masters. You can't BOTH satisfy a god and do actions that benefit humanity. The interesting cases are precisely when those two are in conflict. For example, the Muslims who flew planes into the WTC and Pentagon. They were looking to be martyrs for their religion and rid the world of a few infidels to win 72 regenerating virgins in heaven. Consider how the Vatican hierarchy has yet to be held accountable for their pedophilia cover up. That's because they dispense the magic crackers that Catholics believe will get them to heaven. Other Christians have stayed out of Catholic business because they have a tacit agreement not to criticize each-other.

All the examples I have are cases like these, where a person or group will sell out their fellow man to curry favor with their god. Religions like these carry an inherent conflict of interest and they will always create situations where victims suffer at the expense of some alleged benefit to some god.

Nobody is trying to prevent Christians from "putting Christmas things up" in their own homes, or from doing anything that they want to do. The reason they're always whining, bitching and moaning is because they want to force others to listen to their drivel but they just can't do it since we are protected by the Constitution - that is what this country was founded on - and not Christianity.

Religion produces nothing in terms of knowledge or morality since holy books support genocide and slavery. Gods, demons, angels, miracles, dead people walking around, talking snakes, and talking donkeys. God created us so that he could play peek-a-boo with us? There are numerous absurdities nobody can prove do not exist. That does not mean it's rational to believe they do exist.

Mind you, no one seems to have defined god. Proving that god (a supernatural cause) created the Universe and all life therein would be the most important scientific discovery of all time. It's not a philosophical question. It's a question for science, but creationist scientists don't seem to be able to apply "god" to a single theory that is useful about the origin of the Universe or life in the Universe. We all know god would be the most important scientific discovery of all times, and every scientist would be looking for "Him" if it were not pseudo-science.

It might be a bugger of a fact, nevertheless it's true, all holy books are based on fables and myth "truth" is not involved. Religion is for those whose mind can not yet distinguish between fact and fiction, and no matter how many contradictions and falsehoods are pointed out most theists still believe their "one true god" has all the answers. That's how I see things, but don't let that stop any theist, feel free to apply god indiscriminately whenever there is something you don't understand.

Why can't god speak for himself? I'm perfectly willing to listen. And if god only speaks telepathically, then theists should take a lesson from "Him" and do the same.

Ok you all keep going back to the past, but I will hear you out, most people believe atheist nations are more peaceful and there is some evidence so I will side with you on this argument. One of the biggest reasons I will do this is because if the nation legalizes everything as long as it doesn't conflict with harming others (excluding all drugs) I believe people could go do things that are illegal right now that would help them blow off steam, one example prostitution as weird as it may sound, some girls have no problem selling their bodies and enjoy it so what harm is it id it is regulated and old pissed off people can go and get laid in a safe way lolol. Another marijuana might become legal which is not as violent in provoking as alcohol and could really relieve people, I personally never really liked it, it just put me to sleep lolol but I some people really enjoy it and it is interesting how it doesn't raise blood pressure unlike almost every drug. Thirdly kids wouldn't be raised with nonsense strict guidelines that make them want to rebel and raise hell like some I have seen, I was raised not strict at all and personally believe it has helped me control myself a lot better, nothing wrong with parents just raising you to gold rule only which is what I naturally always felt as a little kid I remember examples as if they were yesterday. The list can go on but those are some reasons I feel it would be better along with the ones you all listed excluding the arguments about the past century's.

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup