RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center

RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 10:38:56 AM)
Is Atheism a belief system or religion? Theists usually define atheism incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a belief system. Atheism is not a religion. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods, from the original Greek meaning of "without gods." That is it. There is nothing more to it. If someone wrote a book titled "Atheism Defined," it would only be one sentence long. http://www.atheists.org/atheism/About_Atheism Its how atheists define it.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 10:39:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Yes, atheism is a belief system, and I (and others) classify it as a religion. Actually, atheism is a lack of a belief, not a belief. What you classify it as is irrelevant. Atheism and the Law by Matt Dillahunty (an atheist, btw). I can give you a more detailed answer, with references and logical reasoning for defining "atheism" (or, more properly "human secularism") as a religious belief system in terms of psychological or social meanings and impact. But we are really just talking about the law, and Constitutional issues here. Firm

Loki45 -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 10:43:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Atheism and the Law by Matt Dillahunty (an atheist, btw). I can give you a more detailed answer, with references and logical reasoning for defining "atheism" (or, more properly "human secularism") as a religious belief system in terms of psychological or social meanings and impact. But we are really just talking about the law, and Constitutional issues here. And within your own link is the line: "The Supreme Court has recognized atheism as EQUIVALENT to a 'religion' for purposes of the First Amendment on numerous occasions" Equivalent to a religion doesn't mean that it is one. I mean in the eyes of the law, it has simliar protections, nothing more.

rulemylife -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:03:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I dont believe requests from the people to members of congress constitutes "pressure" Because you are giving far too little credit to the politics of the time and assuming there were no organized religious movements trying to influence how the country was run. The link should show pg. 122 of this book, which gives a good summary of Christian groups influence in leading up to the decision to put the phrase on coins. Religion and the American Civil War by Randall M. Miller, Harry S. Stout, Charles ... - 1998 - Religion - 422 pages During the war, "In God We Trust" was first engraved on coins, and the Protestant religious feast of Thanksgiving was made a national holiday. ...

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:11:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Is Atheism a belief system or religion? Theists usually define atheism incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a belief system. Atheism is not a religion. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods, from the original Greek meaning of "without gods." That is it. There is nothing more to it. If someone wrote a book titled "Atheism Defined," it would only be one sentence long. http://www.atheists.org/atheism/About_Atheism Its how atheists define it. You're right, Tazzy. To call atheism a religion is absurd, and to call it a belief system is a huge stretch at best. A belief system can best be defined as a set of beliefs that form a framework for how a person lives their life. An absence of belief, or even a single belief (such as the belief that god does not exist), does not constitute a system of beliefs. No matter how much someone tries to twist it around.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:13:18 AM)
quote: This removes it from a separation issue. However, because atheists wish to encourage their own beliefs, they are attacking the historical use. In effect, by not allowing such a usage, the US would be supporting one belief system over others. Which does make it a separation issue if their wishes are granted, because atheists are attempting to use the power of the government to enforce their particular world view and belief system on others who do not wish to share it. Yes, atheism is a belief system, and I (and others) classify it as a religion. I'm sorry, but this is a specious argument. Historical Use can be used to -retain- existing symbols already in place on government buildings, but citing Historical Use to justify placing these symbols on NEW buildings is a perversion of the Constitutional right to freedom of religion. If you want to classify atheism as a religion, then that's fine -- however, that means that MY religion has as much right to prevent your religions' defacing of public government buildings as -your- religion has in attempting to deface them. The absence of something does not deny an individuals' right to believe in, follow, or be exposed to that thing in any private environment or privatized public environment that they choose. By denying the capacity to have "In God We Trust" inscribed permanently on a public building, I am -not- interfering with your capacity to believe in a god, to worship where you want, to pray to your god privately, or to inscribe on your private buildings with anything you choose. HOWEVER, by inscribing "In God We Trust" on a public building, you are -forcing- those who do NOT believe in a god to be included in a public declaration of religious belief in which we do not share. One choice takes -nothing- from anyone. It only fails to -add- an extraneous sentiment that can be fulfilled perfectly well through other media. The other choice denies members of the population with different belief structures (and you can include the polytheists, Buddhists, etc... in fact, any path that does not believe in either ONE god or -any- god) the right to be separately considered for their own beliefs and -not- be collectively trapped under the One God umbrella. DC

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:16:17 AM)
quote: or, more properly "human secularism" Actually, I think the phrase you are looking for is Secular Humanism, as opposed to Spiritual Humanism (also an atheistic concept, as it has -no- collective divine presence extant within the philosophical structure). Secular Humanism is only -one- branch of possibility for the various groupings of those who do not believe in a god or god-like entity. DC

tazzygirl -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:29:12 AM)
Every religious movement has tried to influence... just like the atheist movement is trying too now. Just like the muslims wanted to change school schedules to allow their religion. Eventually we have to start drawing a line. Those who have no religious preference account for roughly 10 percent of the population. Atheists, depending on the source, 7%. Now this percentage is trying to dictate to the rest of the country what we can and cant have and where we can and cant have it.. even on private property. Congress at that time could have said... no thank you. The members of congress decided... men and women of this country. now we are being told its wrong... by a group of people who have decided they dont wish to believe. they find it offensive. i find many things offensive. but when did 10 percent of a country decide what 90 percent can do? if it comes down to it, why not lobby for a vote on such things. why not? then the ACLU wouldnt have a job, perhaps? Muslims got caught by the ACLU running schools with prayers written on the walls, schools that were federally funded. But we are wrong for having school on fridays. Talk about hypocracy. Atheists believe in nothing. that is their right. they do not have the right to tell me what to believe in, that we have to devoid ourselves of every religious reference because they dont believe in it. to me, that is no different than king george telling the church that since the church wont let him divorce, then he will create a new one, and making the old religion illegal. Not having those words on money, buildings, ect, wont bother me a bit... what does bother me is a group of people telling me we cant have those things ... why? because they dont believe in them. while they claim we have to be careful about what religion is pushing for, i state emphatically we have to be careful about how far we allow them to push their belifs, or non beliefs, upon religion.

sirsholly -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:39:01 AM)
quote: Those who have no religious preference account for roughly 10 percent of the population. i do not know if it helps your argument Taz, but i think the 10% might be wrong. This is my own personal opinion, but as i said before there are many of us that say we have no religion. I am one of them. I do not believe in organized religion although i have a strong faith.

Loki45 -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:41:15 AM)
How about we just change the money to read "In Obama we trust."? [sm=couch.gif]

philosophy -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:42:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Every religious movement has tried to influence... just like the atheist movement is trying too now. Just like the muslims wanted to change school schedules to allow their religion. Eventually we have to start drawing a line. ...well, actually no. If you make allowance for one religion, assuming you're a country with a respect for all religions, then you have to make allowances for all of them. No line to be drawn, you've already given up that option.

tazzygirl -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:44:13 AM)
hi Holly to be honest i think the numbers may not reflect those like us who have a strong religious faith, but do not endorse a certain "religion". I looked up many sites that gave statistics on religious numbers... most seem to run between 4% and 10% atheist. 7 % being what most state is the median and the most often given number.

tazzygirl -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 11:45:40 AM)
per the First Amendment?

philosophy -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 12:01:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl per the First Amendment? ...why not?

rulemylife -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 12:05:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Just as you cannot prove there isnt a god, you only have an assumption based upon what others have told you. I was really going to try to stay out of the God exists/doesn't exist argument, but I couldn't keep myself from responding to these comments you made to someone else. You've just given the classic example of a burden of proof fallacy: Description of Burden of Proof Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Examples of Burden of Proof Bill: "I think that we should invest more money in expanding the interstate system." Jill: "I think that would be a bad idea, considering the state of the treasury." Bill: "How can anyone be against highway improvements?" Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers." Jill: "What is your proof?" Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers." "You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does." (Fallacies) quote: Working as a nurse, i have seen many miracles, things science could never explain. I always love this argument for God's existence. It's like the family you see on the news praising God for looking after them when they were able to escape their burning house. Which has always made me wonder if God bothered to save them why didn't he just give a full 100% effort and save their house and all their possessions too.

rulemylife -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 12:25:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Isn't making a law to support atheistic beliefs (no signs of any religion, all religions are nonsense and shouldn't be allowed) supporting one belief system above another? How can a person be offended by the absence of something? Putting a sign promoting the belief in God on a wall creates controversy that a blank wall would not.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 12:29:00 PM)
quote: Every religious movement has tried to influence... just like the atheist movement is trying too now. Just like the muslims wanted to change school schedules to allow their religion. Eventually we have to start drawing a line. Those who have no religious preference account for roughly 10 percent of the population. Atheists, depending on the source, 7%. Now this percentage is trying to dictate to the rest of the country what we can and cant have and where we can and cant have it.. even on private property. Ok, so what you're, essentially, saying here is that, because you're in the majority religion, you should get to cram your beliefs down everyone's throat, force us to look at your choice of art, deny our own beliefs... and that's OK, because there are only about 10% of us (did you include the Pagans, Buddhists, etc., who -also- don't believe in your One God?). Spurious argument. DC

rulemylife -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 12:44:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Or...atheism is the belief that there is no God. See its all in how you approach it. I know it has become very common to label it as such, even in reference sources, but how do you define lack of belief as a belief without getting into serious semantic pretzel-twisting?

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 12:50:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Or...atheism is the belief that there is no God. See its all in how you approach it. I know it has become very common to label it as such, even in reference sources, but how do you define lack of belief as a belief without getting into serious semantic pretzel-twisting? Atheism is the absence of a belief in any god or supreme divine being.

tazzygirl -> RE: Atheists sue to keep 'In God We Trust' off Capitol Visitor Center (7/20/2009 12:53:37 PM)
quote: It’s because we get brainwashed when we are children and told lies that there is a God and lies that there is a Santa Clause. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Just as you cannot prove there isnt a god, you only have an assumption based upon what others have told you. My point was that brainwashing can go both ways, if thats the point you wish to take. People can be convinced something does not exist as quickly as they can that they do. I personally do not follow a "religion". I have a deep faith in karma, with a zen like attitude towards a "god". Atheists took prayer out of the classroom. Schools then barred these kids from praying after school and forming bible clubs. When the courts decided to allow those, it opened the doors to allow other religions to do the same. Some schools have redesigned their school schedule to allow for muslim children to pray during the school day. i have no issue with either of these. If atheists can follow their belief.. or non belief... then why cant the rest follow theirs? no one should HAVE to do so. but those who want too should be allowed. It seems to me a simpler solution should be a ratification to the Constitution, barring religious connotations to any law, public building or gathering, ect. But then we open ourselves up to more restrictions. The christmas day parade would be deemed offensive to those who do not celebrate.. so... its history. Many have tried to bar the christmas tree from public displays. We all have seen the uproar to the public nativity scenes. Would halloween be next? Thanksgiving? would those who are lucky enough to have the holidays off with pay now have to work because an atheist or a non christian person doesnt believe in that holiday? would make a good excuse for businesses to be open then, and to be able to get rid of paying time and a half if you work them. When you start tweaking laws for one group of people, the domino effect can, and often does, occur. Im sure some will say my suppositions are far fetched. but, in reality, if we get rid of god and religion, barring the government from taking a stand, then we in effect are allowing any group to decide what traditions we, as americans, can keep or not keep. This is alot of power for a group that totals.. maybe.. 10% of the population. and how many of them wish to give up traditions and holidays and all they entail?

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875