2007-11-30
00:00:10
·
24 answers
·
asked by
j_emmans
6
in
Social Science
➔ Psychology
remember its the values of atheism - not just separation of church and state.
2007-11-30
02:30:11 ·
update #1
pastor is on to something - these countries already exist! but they have 'strong governments' I am talking about a country with soft government.
2007-11-30
02:32:50 ·
update #2
the foundation stones of the new society would be logic and science. It would have to begin with just children and committed atheist parents. The society would grow and any religious people would not be allow in the country. The young people would not be allowed exposure to any religions and travel to the outside would be forbidden. Films would be science based and any mention of God - even in swear words would be strictly banded by the government departments. Freedom of thought would be encouraged but controlled
2007-11-30
08:56:38 ·
update #3
The problem is there would have to be strong controls to keep it that way. Repression would be a rough way to run anything. Humans have had a belief in a higher being (s) since the beginning of civilization and maybe earlier. True or not, maybe there is something humans inherently need in those beliefs. On the plus side, there would be a lot less judgments and fighting in a country based on atheism, if the majority subscribed to it.
2007-11-30 00:07:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Susan 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
Most definitely. A secular society is a balanced society. I do not practice a religion yet I can see that each have a huge contribution to make. However, laws are not impartial if originated from a unilateral source that is why it is best to appoint an independent thinker who can combine the most effective arguments and produce a balanced result.
Don't fall into the trap of thinking that atheists are soulless, amoral barely functioning beings. But rather, identify (no matter how difficult that may be for some hardliners) that they are not constrained by a predetermined set of guidelines. They have the personal freedom to make balanced, educated and humane decisions through careful consideration of the facts presented.
2007-11-30 10:29:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by Wine Apple 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
No, not at all. I believe in separation between the state and atheism. The UK is becoming an increasingly atheistic state. Public institutions already discriminate against anyone who professes Christianity, for example in social policy, education and in the NHS. I don't think our lives are improving. On the contrary, I think we are heading for totalitarianism, barbarism and far less freedom than we have enjoyed in the past.
2007-11-30 12:47:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Steven Ring 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
there would not be religion discrimination but everything else will still be the same except for a few things , of course everyone would abide by the law but the people will have to learn moral values themselves and knowing us humans we don't really want to waste time doing all these so there would be moral corruption in like a quarter of the town
but then again look on the bright side , we wouldn't have to spend time on sunday at church and give them our money ,that means saving time and money ^^ , and everyone would not put the blame on god for their downfalls and lucky strikes ,it would be what it really is ,life
so technically our lives would actually better but don't forget how many peoples live which would have been helped by religion will now not be able to be helped
so it really doesn't change anything except it changes the examples but our lives would pretty be very much the same
2007-11-30 08:15:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bryce 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Technically we wouldn't be living in an atheist society but an agnostic one, a society where we don't know if there is a God, nor do we care.
One which forces Atheism on people without letting them realise it for themselves is no less repressive than a religious society is e.g the Soviet Union, North Korea.
My advice, let people believe or not to believe. Let them come to their own conclusions.
2007-11-30 08:14:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Chris W 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
A very interesting question, because there is often an immediate assumption that atheists have no values, when in fact, being free to follow your own ethics imposes a greater responsibility on the individual. Blindly following a religion could be compared with being institutionalised, as in someone who has spent a lot of time in hospital, jail or a children's home who wait to be told what to think rather than what to do.
2007-11-30 11:02:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by proud walker 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
For me personally the answer is no I would not want to live in a country based on Atheism. I believe in God and and would not want to live my life in a country where God was not part of it. I try to live my life as Jesus would want, and believe that God is our helper and saviour.
2007-11-30 15:41:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Betti N 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Let's see now which countries are based on atheism today:
1. Communist China
How would your life improve if you moved there?
2. North Korea
How would your life improve if you moved there?
3. Cuba
How would your life improve if you moved there?
Did anyone notice how many people world wide want to immigrate to these three countries?
Compare that to how many want to immigrate to the USA, the world's most Christian Country?
Pastor Art
2007-11-30 08:56:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
It would depend. Does the country allow religious practices? Just not evangelizing? Or no religious expression whatsoever?
If religion was simply a private matter, within my own home and family or other private homes and shuls, then maybe that would be a good thing. It would be a relief not to have jesus sold to me on every corner.
However, if you mean a country that does not allow religion at all, that would not be an improvement. Faith provides comfort for millions of people.
2007-11-30 08:05:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by sahel578 5
·
2⤊
4⤋
What you are speaking of is an anti-theocracy... where the government is built on the belief that there is no god and the official state doctrine is against freedom of religion.
I don't see how one extreme is any better than the next.
2007-11-30 08:05:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by sincityq 5
·
3⤊
1⤋