Atheism and Ethics

[ThatOwlWoman]

I am a spiritual atheist, if that even makes any sense.

I just googled and found this wiki entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit..._not_religious

Not exactly what I am trying to convey but there you go.

I know exactly what you mean because that is my belief as well.

[Legion]

Another thing I would like to mention is there isnt a doctrine of atheism, theres nothing to learn, nothing to memorize, no figurehead to look up to. Atheism isn't a practice and requires no emotional or intellectual investment. It's a simple truth in the life of the atheist that they acknowledge that they dont believe in God. There is nothing further beyond that. Anybody can be an atheist. There is no requirement to fulfill. No action needed.

Atheism seems to me to be like a terrorist organization.

It's unofficial, there are no uniform identifiers, there is no unifying dogma, anyone can drift in and out as circumstances dictate by making a bald statement of non-belief, and the non-believer can disavow any embarrassing excesses by disavowal; i.e., "that's not real atheism". The practitioners can melt into the general population to avoid taking responsibility as the need arises.

[Doc Dutch]

This topic heading is quite broad so I'm going to just start this off without a huge thesis and encourage participants to expand the discussion as they personally see fit. Let it wander within the limits of the thread title.

So, the subject of the relationship of atheism and religion with ethics has changed in recent years as the social climate has changed in the USA, much of this is due to demographics changes and class changes where former minority cultures are replacing what has traditionally been in place for a long time. One could argue that the entire purpose of Judeo-Christian religions is to instill a sense of ethics in people. Those ethics and social traditions are what most of us in America are accustomed to. Now you have islamic ethics pushing to challenge those American values as immigrants continue to pour in from those respective countries. And then you have atheism and its associated acts such as satanism and brutal skepticism, which isnt a religion, but a culture in itself, also jumping in to challenge the Judeo-Christian religion, throwing their own spin on what is ethical and not ethical.

The problem here is a single culprit in satanism as it embodies using the enemies of Christianity to strengthen its attack and since satanists call themselves atheists and usually hide their satanic affiliations they cause many problems that arise from their lack of ethics and lack of lawfulness for the scientific and skeptical atheists whom although might not be religious continue to live in an ethical and lawful manner. This damages the reputation of the true atheists that live honorable lives and dont spend their time devising ways to challenge and attack the religions that surround them.

So, a question of ethics regarding atheists should now, due to the current social climate and the explosion of satanism, should now always come with a pretext of "no-satanist atheists" so as not to muddle the blame around and make the true skeptic, the true atheist, the true scientist the fall guy and scapegoat for the costumed crusaders out there.

This was a subject matter I have been wanting to discuss for some time now. Any further comments or ideas here?

Prove Satan exists. Otherwise, if Satan doesn't exist, then what's the problem with Satanists as long as they follow the law?

[Doc Dutch]

Atheism seems to me to be like a terrorist organization.

It's unofficial, there are no uniform identifiers, there is no unifying dogma, anyone can drift in and out as circumstances dictate by making a bald statement of non-belief, and the non-believer can disavow any embarrassing excesses by disavowal; i.e., "that's not real atheism". The practitioners can melt into the general population to avoid taking responsibility as the need arises.

Great. Just like the KKK, Neo-Nazis and other assorted groups of assholes.

[Legion]

a very clear admission that atheism is nothing more than a faith choice.......like any other religion.......

As is "environmentalism", with its rigid dogma that deifies "science" as infallible.

[Scientist]

There isn't really much you have to do to be religious either. As far as things go for my religiousness, I feel I have even less weight or things I need to do. Why ever be an atheist anyway? That's going above and beyond, giving it a title and decrying religiousness. I'd say the only people who fit under what your definition are those with no needed title religious or atheist, that are just going about life.

Well, the only reason anyone would say they are Atheist is because someone asked them what their religion is. At that point there is a division among atheists; half of them will say they are Christian or spiritual although they are not to simply avoid discussing religion, the other half will say they are atheist because they are so upset with religion they dont want to be seen as a part of it. And that division comes from personal experience with each atheist. Do you ever see atheists running around preaching to people or asking people, "Do you not believe in God?" Never. Atheists bother the least number of people and are predisposed to not ask personal questions and purposefully cause disruptions. I think there is a connection between religious/non-religious affiliation and personality traits.

[Scientist]

Actually the term "atheism" is a reactionary term.

Without theism, there wouldn't be atheism.

I was just about to mention that, so yes, for the sake of political correctness, non-religious would work well.

[jacksonsprat22]

This topic heading is quite broad so I'm going to just start this off without a huge thesis and encourage participants to expand the discussion as they personally see fit. Let it wander within the limits of the thread title.

So, the subject of the relationship of atheism and religion with ethics has changed in recent years as the social climate has changed in the USA, much of this is due to demographics changes and class changes where former minority cultures are replacing what has traditionally been in place for a long time. One could argue that the entire purpose of Judeo-Christian religions is to instill a sense of ethics in people. Those ethics and social traditions are what most of us in America are accustomed to. Now you have islamic ethics pushing to challenge those American values as immigrants continue to pour in from those respective countries. And then you have atheism and its associated acts such as satanism and brutal skepticism, which isnt a religion, but a culture in itself, also jumping in to challenge the Judeo-Christian religion, throwing their own spin on what is ethical and not ethical.

The problem here is a single culprit in satanism as it embodies using the enemies of Christianity to strengthen its attack and since satanists call themselves atheists and usually hide their satanic affiliations they cause many problems that arise from their lack of ethics and lack of lawfulness for the scientific and skeptical atheists whom although might not be religious continue to live in an ethical and lawful manner. This damages the reputation of the true atheists that live honorable lives and dont spend their time devising ways to challenge and attack the religions that surround them.

So, a question of ethics regarding atheists should now, due to the current social climate and the explosion of satanism, should now always come with a pretext of "no-satanist atheists" so as not to muddle the blame around and make the true skeptic, the true atheist, the true scientist the fall guy and scapegoat for the costumed crusaders out there.

This was a subject matter I have been wanting to discuss for some time now. Any further comments or ideas here?

You're that troll who keeps talking about satanism. Is there something you want to confess?

[jacksonsprat22]

Atheism seems to me to be like a terrorist organization.

It's unofficial, there are no uniform identifiers, there is no unifying dogma, anyone can drift in and out as circumstances dictate by making a bald statement of non-belief, and the non-believer can disavow any embarrassing excesses by disavowal; i.e., "that's not real atheism". The practitioners can melt into the general population to avoid taking responsibility as the need arises.

Trump and the GOP are terrorists.

[PostmodernProphet]

Moral standards are mostly social, certainly, and they've often been derived from religions, but the practice of societies often goes totally against the tenets of the originating religion - Americans, for instance, seem mostly to have gone there to make money, and to care much, much more for that than traditional - let alone scriptural - Christian values. In our Seventeenth Century various 'religious'
beliefs were the means by which very deep social, political and moral divisions emerged. As lot of the present argument tends to date back to people's (particularly Marx's) reaction to the way religion was used to support some very nasty regimes in Europe , partly as a psychological enforcer, partly as a pain reliever (that's what opium was used for mainly back then, which is why it was 'the opium of the people'). Ethics, I think, is a sort of rarified philosophic version of morals, so I leave that alone. My English teacher at school used to tell us that philosophy was a study for old men, and I evidently haven't got there yet. I think that in our sorts of society morals tend to reveal the deep tug-of-war between a person's own interests and what keeps any sort of society functioning.

wait!......you mean some Americans aren't Christians?!?.....

[Scientist]

I am a spiritual atheist, if that even makes any sense.

I just googled and found this wiki entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit..._not_religious

Not exactly what I am trying to convey but there you go.

I am willing to believe there is an extra-dinensional element in the universe that we are all connected to and most people arent aware of and in fact the US government declassified some records that confirmed the existence of inter-dimensional living beings that describes their co-existence with humans on earth. So, call it what you will, spiritual, electrical, inter-dimensional, theres some official recognition there that these things are real and that our reality isnt as square and fully understood as many would like us to believe. The critical part for humans though is that we continue to uncover these things we dont understand methodically and scientifically and very carefully.

[Scientist]

I cannot totally agree with that statement........moral standards (distinction is necessary here, because "ethics" is simply the scientific study of morality) are individually held......each person must decide what they believe to be right and wrong........however, when an individual joins a social group they tend to adopt the same moral standards that they identify among others in that group........religions are the most obvious example of that......

I agree.

[Scientist]

You're that troll who keeps talking about satanism. Is there something you want to confess?

I am actually not very interested in satanism and only mention it here now on this board because it has become a hot topic in my life. But no, I dont practice satanism nor lend to it my credibility. In fact, I think the last time I ever talked about satanism with anyone wasn't on the internet and it was about 10 years ago. Not a common topic with me.

[Scientist]

Trump and the GOP are terrorists.

Acts of terrorism include murdering people in public, destroying property and causing a lockdown as the civilians escape to safety.

[jacksonsprat22]

I am actually not very interested in satanism and only mention it here now on this board because it has become a hot topic in my life. But no, I dont practice satanism nor lend to it my credibility. In fact, I think the last time I ever talked about satanism with anyone wasn't on the internet and it was about 10 years ago. Not a common topic with me.

Why mention satanism? Not a hard question.