Is God dead? Atheism finds a market in the U.S.

[CaroleG]

Publishers Weekly said the business has seen "a striking number of impassioned critiques of religion -- any religion, but Christianity in particular," a probably inevitable development given "the super-soaking of American politics and culture with religion in recent years."

Paul Kurtz, founder of the Council for Secular Humanism and publisher of Free Inquiry magazine, said, "The American public is really disturbed about the role of religion in U.S. government policy, particularly with the Bush administration and the breakdown of church-state separation, and secondly with the conflict in the Mideast."

They are turning to free thought and secular humanism and publishers have recognized a taste for that, he added.

"I've published 45 books, many critical of religion," Kurtz said. "I think in America we have this notion of tolerance ... it was considered bad taste to criticize religion. But I think now there are profound questions about age-old hatreds."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/18/AR2006101800293.html

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. yippee! ! ! ! At long last!

and about time. I hope we can gather our forces and stop these religious freaks from destroying our country.

[FormerDittoHead]

2. You can believe what you want. I'd settle for logic and reason. n/t

[Warpy]

3. He's missing the criticism that's come from a lot of

mainstream Christians. It's not just the Atheist Menace, you know, a lot of Chrsitans out there have noticed the huge disconnect between the religious right and Christ's teachings.

Blaming all the criticism on mean old atheists is just a deflection, a red herring, a lie.

[iamahaingttta]

4. Is God dead?

I certainly hope so!
That asshole did nothing but fuck people up for thousands of years.
We'll get along just fine without him!
Goodbye and good riddance.

Now if we can just rid ourselves of the people who still think he's somehow relevant...

[TallahasseeGrannie]

5. Hitler had some good ideas

about that. I think you'd like his writings.

[moobu2]

6. Like this

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was his fight against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly, it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see them work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week they have only for their wages wretchedness and misery. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom today this poor people are plundered and exposed." -Adolf Hitler

[TallahasseeGrannie]

7. Exactly.

And he was so efficient at putting his ideas into effect. A regular Walt Disney, that guy.

[iamahaingttta]

22. Granny,

Please read my response below...

[Random_Australian]

8. Uh uh uh iamahaingtta,

show some respect for those who believe. In all honesty, just because God does not exist does not mean believing in such a thing has no value.

[greyl]

9. Butt candle! nt

[Random_Australian]

10. On edit, message deleted. It'll save the mods the trouble.

Synopsis: Get fucked sideways by your uncle.

[greyl]

11. oh, boy.

Show some respect for those who believe in the butt candles, why don't ya? ;)
Will I never understand the problem?

edit: for those who are wondering what the heck this is about: http://buttcandle.com/ (there are no offensive photos-work safe)

[Random_Australian]

12. Me disrespecting? YOU are discriminating against my membership in the

"punch people who mention that in the head" religion.

[greyl]

13. I'm not discriminating against your membership,

I'm willing to deal with the consequences.

When did your membership in the PPWMTITH grant you the priviledge to infringe upon my membership in the Freedom of Lighthearted Speech religion?

[Random_Australian]

14. Because of clause #1, you ignorant fool.

Chapter One, Book one, Verse One:

1-1: No-one else is entitled to mention that thing at any point ever.

[greyl]

15. Did good reason precede that dogma? nt

[Random_Australian]

16. reason, manners, dogma needs neither. eom

[greyl]

17. I don't understand what you're saying. nt

[Random_Australian]

18. You said that word.

So I make up stuff until you stop.

DNE EHT.

Edit: Let's stop this. It is off-topic. And I think you might be merry again.

[greyl]

19. The topic was "Is God Dead?".

I'm guessing that you took issue with someone saying they hope so, and giving a short, blunt rant about the topic because you wanted to assume the role of "good atheist" in opposition to a "bad" atheist.

It may be true that the statement,"Now if we can just rid ourselves of the people who still think he's somehow relevant..." was sadly worded, but the example you're setting by your behaviour in these few posts is that someone who is offended by the most unreasonable things has a right to request others to be silent.

I think that's bullshit. Nobody has a right to not be offended, but everyone has the ability and the self evident right to grow beyond taking offense. You add just as much sorrow to the world when you take offense as when you give it, eh?

cheers.

[Random_Australian]

20. You're guessing wrong.

I have no issue with someone saying that God is dead, so it looks like your assumption was almost as flawed as your next one:

"you wanted to assume the role of "good atheist" in opposition to a "bad" atheist."

This is precisely where you become full of utter hypocrisy.

1) You assume that I am trying to play a role. And that is precisely where you are wrong. After all, could it -just maybe- be possible that I didn't like the connotations of getting rid of the believers? Nope - I have to be playing a role. Trying to make myself look like someone I'm not.

For the record, I don't do that. What you see is what you get.

2) You say "someone who is offended by the most unreasonable things has a right to request others to be silent."

Or allow me to re-iterate it as I see it -

A) "I take offense at your demeanor! It is too nice! Be silent!"

B) "Someone who is offended by unreasonable things has no right to command others to silence!"

I think you get the point.

Moving on -

"It may be true that the statement,"Now if we can just rid ourselves of the people who still think he's somehow relevant..." was sadly worded, but the example you're setting by your behaviour in these few posts"

I see it - when the other guy says "get rid of the believers" it is poorly worded, yet when I don't specify that it was only that phrase that seemed mighty anti-social, it is something to take high offence at. Ah, my bad.



"You add just as much sorrow to the world when you take offense as when you give it, eh?"

[iamahaingttta]

21. Didn't realize I'd started a shitstorm...

...not that I particularly mind.

Look, I really don't care if some grown-up adult chooses to believe in fairy tales. I realize that it's none of my business. If that's what gets you through the night, it's alright.

It's the "relevant" that is the key. Because relevant has a way of morphing into "necessary." Which has a way of becoming "or else." Are you paying attention to what is happening to this country? There's a large segment who believe that the entire world must live under their dominion or be destroyed. There are literally tens of millions of American citizens who would rather destroy the whole planet and everyone on it than have to deal with the notion that maybe their belief system is not correct. All because some old book says so.

That's pretty fucked up, people!

And of course, they've made an enemy of and are in the throes of a Crusade against another group of people on the other side of the planet, who believe similar claptrap, but from the perspective of the other crazy brother. (Issac and Ishmael)

So, yes. I do believe that people who think all this mumbo-jumbo is relevant TO MY LIFE need to be removed from polite society, and put in a place where they can DO ME AND YOU NO HARM. Forever...

[Random_Australian]

25. Storm in a teacup, more like.

The only thing I took issue with was how many people I thought you wanted to get rid of; once you said this:

"Look, I really don't care if some grown-up adult chooses to believe in fairy tales. I realize that it's none of my business. If that's what gets you through the night, it's alright."

Then it was all fine.

[greyl]

23. I just don't get where you're coming from.

I type the words "butt candle", and that results in you telling me to get fucked sideways by my uncle? (who knows what your post said before you edited it) This, after you admonish someone else because their choice of words offended you?
In the context of the OP's article, it makes little sense to me. In any context, really.

Fwiw, I didn't mean you were assuming the role of someone you're not. Is this all just a culture gap issue, or what?

[Random_Australian]

24. It's a something gap.

There was nothing in the post before it was edited. I just posted "..." and then edited - because at that stage I thought you had posted about 'that' because you were kidding around with me, so it was kinda tongue-in-cheek, as opposed to serious. :shrug: I mean really, when I am talking about a "punch people in the head religion" you didn't take me seriously, right? I don't have a violent bone in my body, after all.

I'll edit in why I thought you said I was assuming a role - you might just be trying to talk to me after all.

Here we go, pretty explicit to me... how is this not telling me I am assuming a role?

"about the topic because you wanted to assume the role of "good atheist" in opposition to a "bad" atheist."

[greyl]

26. I agree.

I was trying to kid around with you, too. A good natured ribbing.
I was also trying to use our conflict to illustrate a point related to the OP, and I'm genuinely sorry if I was hamfisted. I was hoping we could riff through the tension.

Cheers!

[Random_Australian]

27. Ooooh! Fascinating!

So, what was the point to be illustrated? Come on, spill the beans matey!

[greyl]

28. Should we continue with the place setting references?

Or, should we get back to how people are murdered because they break rules?

[Random_Australian]

29. What place setting references?

Examples, drat you! :)

[greyl]

30. tea pots, teacups & kettles. nt

[Random_Australian]

31. I'll happily discuss practically anything.

So I put it to you that the position 'one ought not to take offence' is inheritly flawed because the manifestation of the disagreement with some thing (like taking offence) is eventually taking offence!

:)

[greyl]

32. But, it's not that one shouldn't take offense,

it's that if one chooses to take offense, they have added that perception to the world.

(I think it's a Shakti Gawain quote. Maybe Ken Keyes.)

[Random_Australian]

33. This does not necessarily make it their fault -

after all, the choices we make are only choices within reason - for instance if you told someone "Black people should go back to africa", then the fault for offence is more on the feet of the person talking.

In other words, these perceptions are made from people's interactions.

P.S. I responded to your pm.