English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I served four years in the United States Military. Since I am an atheist, did I do that because of my values, of patrotism, loyalty to country, or was I just doing that to further the agenda of the dark lord Satan?

2007-01-29 03:15:05 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

13 answers

I served 4 years in the US Navy. There are certain shared values. One, life. Two, freedom.

I never was on a battlefield, but I watched someone's head get twisted off by a car there. it was really morbid!

2007-01-29 03:21:32 · answer #1 · answered by Cold Fart 6 · 4 0

Atheists and Christians can share the same values. There are many patriotic Christians who are also in the military but it's not a prerequisite to be Christian or of any faith to be in the military. I was never in the military and Im not very patriotic, this doesnt mean I have more or less Christian values, it just means I see things different than some other people. I don't support this war effort, but I do support the troops. Whether I agree with a reason for war or not, they ARE fighting in attempt to keep us safe here.

2007-01-29 03:23:49 · answer #2 · answered by impossble_dream 6 · 1 0

I do think atheists and theists have shared values. As a Pagan, I share many core values with my atheist wife, such as curiosity, skepticism, and a respect for nature and science. Atheists have worked with Christians on conservative causes like "cleaning up" media--the late atheist actor Steve Allen took this on as a cause. Also, some atheists are pro-life. See what I mean at:

http://www.godlessprolifers.org

Of course, the best illustration of atheists working with a variety of theists to promote shared values, from Deists to very strong Protestant Christians, would be the American Revolution and the documents it produced.

2007-01-29 03:24:13 · answer #3 · answered by GreenEyedLilo 7 · 2 0

Moral values such as respect for human life are a result of evolution and social upbringing, not religion. Hence, both atheists and theists follow similar moral codes, at least when it comes to the most important issues.

There's no valid proof that theists are any less likely to succumb to temptations of the flesh or substance abuse than atheists are.

2007-01-29 03:24:06 · answer #4 · answered by magistra_linguae 6 · 3 0

human beings often corrupt the word "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" into "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence". The latter for sure, isn't authentic. With each and every time you seem for some thing and fail to locate any incidences of it, you would possibly want to diminish the prospect of it, yet not in any respect to 0. the load of evidence does no longer lie with the adverse declare. that is the position Russell's teapot is equipped in. If I say that there is a teapot orbiting the solar, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, too small too be considered by technique of a telescope, and that's been there on the grounds that earlier we had spaceflight ability, that declare has a burden of evidence. The declare that the teapot does no longer exist does no longer carry any burden of evidence. You left an major and straightforward actuality out of the middle: "i do no longer trust that God exists." enable us learn the declare. No reason is given. they have made no affirmative declare of nonexistence. there is not any burden of evidence. subsequently, although, there are various believers who will say that the guy honestly believes yet is in denial. there is not any evidence to refute that declare, yet there are some who will. the load of evidence argument, as atheists use that is mostly valid. The adverse burden of evidence utilized by technique of theists is mostly no longer valid.

2016-12-03 04:47:32 · answer #5 · answered by schebel 4 · 0 0

The United States doesn't send soldiers to war to spread the word of God so I don't see a problem, the separation of church and state issue has already been settled. If you don't know why you fight the wars, then I have no idea either, but it doesn't have to do with religion anymore. It's about whether or not these wars are even moral.

2007-01-29 03:23:00 · answer #6 · answered by James P 6 · 0 0

+Well I'm an atheist and I'm a nice person with a lot of self control and I believe in moderation..

But that really is besides the point...
they would be hypocrites even to claim that since they claim all that matters are your beliefs and opinions,
not how moral you are.
(Evangelicals believe goodness does not get you into heaven and that they are not "perfect" they are "saved", so that should answer it,
they have nothing to say on morality at all since their core values should make the point moot)

2007-01-29 03:23:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I hear ya. Just because we do not fear eternal damnation doesn't mean we don't do the right thing in life. In fact, I put we atheists on a higher level because we do the right thing even though we know we will not receive a reward for it in the great fairytale heaven in the sky.

2007-01-29 03:24:03 · answer #8 · answered by glitterkittyy 7 · 3 1

Drugs no, they are not productive.

Sex is great fun.

It really depends on the theist. I really resonate with some Neo-Pagans I know.

2007-01-29 03:21:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

If it's not for God...
=0)

2007-01-29 03:20:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers