I am sad to see people all around the world - especially our top 'thinkers' in our universities moan and whine about people not having - or not having enough - rights to practice religions.
What about the freedom of NOT having to practice any religions?The freedom to embrace logic over superstition?
The general PC crowd love bitching about why certain religious immigrants are unable to practice their religions, but they close their ears and shut their eyes towards the plights of apostates around the world - especially in Egypt, Malaysia and Afganistan.
Heck, we even have a US president who said atheists don't belong in his country.
Somehow, the rights and respects of atheists are a lot lower compared to religionists - even the bloodthirsthy ones.
What are your thoughts on this people?
2007-04-13 00:37:49 · 23 answers · asked by Who_am_i 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
kawaii_ona20, what you are arguing is known as the Pascal's Wager - a logical fallacy of argumentum ad baculum.
Google it.
2007-04-13 00:45:37 · update #1
ohyeah y, tonight your house will be stormed by angry PCists and beated to a bloody pulp.
LOL just kidding. But I agree strongly with you on that. Communism IS good - on certain areas that is.
2007-04-13 00:51:04 · update #2
L.W.A, all countries who gives a pro-terrorist imam crying for the death of kaffirs more respect than an atheist who only want to live in peace - all Western countries, that is - are bastard countries.
2007-04-13 00:57:21 · update #3
We should be free to not have religion. However, increasingly, religion has strived to leverage government to promote itself. This is wrong, but it is hard to counter. Atheists just aren't generally as organized as religious zealots.
Luckily, education does help. I think we're new seeing a swing back over to the side of reason, and we each swing we become a bit more secular. So, I'm optimistic.
2007-04-13 00:39:50 · answer #1 · answered by nondescript 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Technically, if you want to get rid of superstition, what about what happened last minute? Superstition means "over standing", as in "standing over from the past."
This is Christianity's take on getting rid of superstition.
The apostle James said in James 4:13 Now listen, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money." 14 Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. 15 Instead, you ought to say, "If it is the Lord's will, we will live and do this or that." 16 As it is, you boast in your arrogant schemes. All such boasting is evil. 17 So then, if you know the good you ought to do and don't do it, you sin.
2007-04-13 00:47:33 · answer #2 · answered by Christian person 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Atheism is generally regarded as a "freedom from religion", in that you cannot be discriminated because of your lack of religion.
But yes, the world is mad. We are in yet another chapter, of a long running war between the two biggest religions, called the "crusades" - it's a never ending war it would seem.
I think what you want, is legislation BANNING religion - while an entirely different topic, it is something humankind will one day have to do.
2007-04-13 00:44:10 · answer #3 · answered by aisha_rulz 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The structure does no longer supply the skill to inform someone to be non secular. it really is the point. you're given the freedom of religion by using the structure. you're not to any extent further given the freedom FROM faith. this signifies that the authorities does no longer have the duty to guard you at the same time as your emotions are damage by using the perspectives of any non secular sect... be they Christian, Muslim, Atheist, or in the different case.
2016-11-23 16:51:19 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i agree, but it is not just religion, people in general have something against others who have different beliefs.
That is very wrong that the USA president said that, very wrong. It is not people who do not believe in a god that are fighting and killing it is the ones who do, as that is what a lot of the fighting is about, so i am shocked he said that about unbelievers not belonging in his country, sounds like what a Muslim terrorist would say!!! ( nothing against Muslims, just terrorists)
2007-04-13 00:44:10 · answer #5 · answered by delbolof 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've been wondering the same thing. its like our country and all the other people in this world is forcing us to have a religion that we don't want, for example our money have In God we trust I thought we came here for the soul purpose of separating religion from state then they make it where we have to have something dilling with religion to survive. grrr
2007-04-13 00:44:25 · answer #6 · answered by eclipsefreak 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hey, did you hear about that pagan group that someone put a bloody dead bird on their windshield? No, seriously. Bush said atheists didn't belong, but it's not like he kicked us out or put us in concentration camps. He said something offensive like always, but he didn't act upon it. I don't see any athiests getting beaten to a pulp around here.
2007-04-13 00:43:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Given time, the few left that will still be practising religion will be seen as curious eccentrics.
Globally, atheism is on the rise. As people communicate more and become better educated, religion will wither away and die.
2007-04-13 00:45:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Here is my point, If you have the choice of having or not having a religion, i would say i will choos having one. Logic is, if you have one that can save you, then good but if what you believe isn't true anyway, then there is nothing to lose. it is a win-win situation.
2007-04-13 00:42:46 · answer #9 · answered by kawai_ona20 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i am a staunch Catholic. but i agree with your view. we should learn to be religion-tolerant. in my case, when i feel the person i'm dealing with is agnostic or aetheist, i don't condemn or push my religion down their throat. the moment you tell a person what he believes (or does not believe) in is wrong, you close the door to any congenial conversation. so yes, i think people should have that freedom.
2007-04-13 00:44:14 · answer #10 · answered by David 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋