I posted this in the A&A group also..

[Union Yes]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=263x38338

[elocs]

1. Religion is about faith and faith is not about proof.

This is true of religions all around the world.

[Deep13]

3. Faith has to have some basis in fact before one can have faith in it.

Ultimately one must accept as true some aspect about belief system X before one can have faith in it. You didn't pull religion X out of thin air. There has to be some reason why you believe it.

So, I think your assertion is false.

[elocs]

5. Faith has nothing to do with proof. A definition:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith

"2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust"

Notice the part where it says: "firm belief in something for which there is no proof.

Again, faith has nothing to do with proof.

[Deep13]

8. Why do people think there's a god to have faith in?

The idea had to come from somewhere.

[elocs]

16. Believing in a god or gods is certainly nothing new in human history.

From Christianity to tribal religions it has gone on for thousands of years and always will.

[Deep13]

23. That's my point.

They believe because their parents or whomever did. That's their "evidence."

[elocs]

24. The definition of faith that I posted states that it requires no proof.

Either words have a meaning or they don't, but I suppose you can have a word mean whatever you like to yourself.

Children also tend to follow the political leanings of their parents, but then people do tend to want to emulate those they love or respect and that has nothing to do with proof either. (Interesting, "love" and "respect" are both things which can truly exist without any need of "proof".)

Faith: either you have it or you don't. I think many who have had faith have lost it or been burned by it and like being burned by love they become bitter. DU is a place where if religion is mentioned there is a whole host of DUers who foam at the mouth about it, so it makes me wonder.

[Deep13]

25. Why doesn't anyone believe in rocket-powered pink penguins?

It's in no ones tradition. People take holy books and the traditions of parents and society as evidence, although I agree that in fact they have none.

You really don't see evidence of love or respect? That's sad. I see evidence of both every day. Besides, we know for a fact that love and respect actually exist. Hell, they can be measured on an MRI image of the brain. There is no corresponding evidence of god and plenty of counter-indications.

You can see foaming mouths over the internet? Yeah, I know what you mean. Having an opinion different than yours does not make me or anyone else crazy (which is what you are implying).

My wife has no faith because growing up she was never programmed to have it. Consequently, she is unburdened by what the religious characterize as great questions. I don't have it because I came to realize that it is a fraud. I went to a liberal church and kept going after my Catholic fundamentalist asshole step-father left. It was the beliefs themselves that drove me away. And yeah, those who have suffered because of religion are justified in their antagonism. But this is all ad hominem and irrelevent to what faith is or whether or not there is a god.

[darkstar3]

27. +1 and then some. n/t

[Dorian Gray]

30. I can agree with that

and in no way do I equate religion with science. I don't think they are in the same realm, and it perplexes me that this needs to be an OP. (It also perplexes me that people want Creationism to be studied in science class, for the record.) Either way, I don't know any religious who truly believe that religious belief should be taught in lieu of scientific thought in science class.

[ThomThom]

2. All that you say is true, but what you leave out is what religion gives people

It brings them a philosophy and a way of living that helps them live their lives with respect and dignity. Faith is very important to many people and it is very sad that some would misled followers with crazy stuff like many have done now and in the past for their own personal gain. Yes, the list is long of atrocities committed in the name of religion but so are the tales of great generosity and compassion. I am a non-believer and would join no church but I do respect the beliefs of others and defend their right to believe. I also believe in separation of church and state and do not want religion in my government or my tax dollars used to preach. It is up to each individual what they will believe or not believe and forcing one's will on another is wrong which ever side does it. Respecting other people is the only way forward.

[Deep13]

4. So god is nonsense, but sometimes it's good to believe nonsense.

How contemptible.

"Respecting other people is the only way forward."

Sure. We are talking about ideas here, not people. No one is suggesting people should not have freedom of belief. I can respect people without necessarily respecting everything they believe. And again, the most I could do is pretend to respect their beliefs and I decline to engage in that level of dishonesty.

[ThomThom]

6. I did not say God is nonsense, I said I am not a believer.

I am not sure how you respect people without respecting their beliefs. Sounds like you are faking respect but in your heart you have contempt, that is dishonesty.

[Silent3]

7. I respect *the right* people have to believe as they choose...

...and I also don't expect perfection nor agreement in all things in order to give people basic respect. It's perfectly possible, therefore, to not respect a person's belief but still respect the person.

When you start talking about what people get out of religion, that drives me in the opposite direction from respecting their beliefs, because it casts those beliefs and crutches one uses when unable or unwilling to face uncertainty or harsh realities.

[ThomThom]

9. I really do respect your right to believe what you want but I don't understand

what you mean in your post. You can disagree with a persons position and still respect them is that what you are saying? I agree with that but not everyone will have your ability to see with the clarity that you hint you have. We are all at different places on our journeys, one must give everyone else a chance to get there in their own time. Being impatient with others progress only show where your progress has stopped.

[Deep13]

11. No.

Fist, I'm not sure what you mean by "journey." Giving people additional information to consider will not hinder people in finding the truth. At worst, my information will be useless and those people will be in the exact same position they are in now. I say "my information" because some purported facts are specifically designed to fool people. And again, what makes you think I am speaking out for their benefit? I have the same right to express my opinion as religious people have to express theirs. I have no special duty to shut up.

[Silent3]

12. Is being Republican a "different place" on a "journey"?

And therefore I should respect the Republican platform?

[ThomThom]

18. No you can disagree with Republicans all day. I certainly do.

But disrespecting the person because of there beliefs is all I am talking about. We can never come to an understanding without civility. There are lots of reasons why Republicans believe the way they do and the same goes for the left.

[Silent3]

22. I see no reason to treat religious or so-called "spiritual" beliefs...

...as different from political systems, economic theories, scientific theories, etc. Treating religion as if it gets extra respect automatically, more than any other area of human thought, or acting as if religion must be handled oh-so-delicately compared to other things, gives it a special advantage I don't think it deserves.

It's counterproductive for me as an atheist to aid and abet the elevation of religion.

[Deep13]

10. Wrong.

People =/= beliefs. A person's opinion about god is not the same as something integral to the person like race or gender. A person cannot change his or her skin color, but anyone can change his or her mind. Your statement suggests that you cannot see how anyone can respect another person who disagrees with him about anything. That's like saying, I just can't respect a person who thinks the city is a better place to live than the suburbs. Or, on a more factual matter, how can I respect anyone who thinks there are 6.5 billion people rather than 6.8 billion?

My sister thinks getting a flu shot will weaken her immune system. She is demonstrably wrong. Your argument suggests that I cannot respect her as a person or love her because she has an opinion that is different from mine and is factually wrong. Frankly, if you really think that you cannot respect someone who has a different opinion than you about religion, that is a devastating admission about your own intellectual maturity. Obviously (and I mean really obviously) people are more than their opinions about religion. And obviously, I can respect and love a person while having no respect for the idea that god exists.

P.S. God is nonsense.

[ThomThom]

20. see my post #18

later
I have to go

[Deep13]

26. Thanks. I submit you have not explained anything.

I am not being remotely uncivil. Sit in on a peer review or go to the local appellate court on argument day sometime. Disagreeing adamantly is not incivility. As I said, I do respect religious people who are otherwise respectable. I just don't respect the idea of god or any of the particulars that specific religions attach to that idea. It has no basis in fact (and I'm including all those intangible reasons that people rely on). Again, the best I can do is to pretend I respect it, and that goes against my values and beliefs which are to find the truth.

By insisting that I pretend to respect people's irrational beliefs, you are judging me by your religious values (in particular that religious beliefs have value). That is in fact a form of religious bigotry--like criticizing Muslims for not saying prayers to the so-called Virgin Mary. As a nonbeliever I see no distinction between religious ideas and any other idea. They are all open to skeptical review, open and honest discussion and, frankly, ridicule if they deserve it. Again, I'm talking about ideas, not persons. If I said my cousin became pregnant because of the holy spirit, I would end up in a probate court idiocy proceeding. Yet, the same idea about an ancient woman who may not even have existed is praise-worthy and deserving of respect. Living by the traditions and customs set down in the Iliad is ridiculous. Living by Biblical rules somehow deserves respect. Sorry, I can't bring myself to be that dishonest.

[SidneyCarton]

21. And you don't believe anything that others consider nonsense Deep13?

Just wondering. I would imagine that some of the ideas and ideals that you hold, and make you feel that there is a degree of dignity, or meaning in your life might be considered contemptible nonsense to others. Ought your beliefs in these matters be tolerated, or should they be treated as the nonsense they are percieved to be?

[rug]

13. Who is saying faith is defined by science?

[JerseygirlCT]

14. Yup, any more than

science is defined by faith.

Two different things entirely.

[Deep13]

15. I don't see how they are all that different.

Taking something on faith means one is presuming the veracity of a purported fact without evidence (or at least without conclusive evidence.)

Science is a way of finding the truth about a purported fact.

Either way, it concerns purported facts. At some point humanity will have to admit that one method finds facts (or at least eliminates falsehoods) while the other does not. The geocentric universe was once taken for granted as an article of faith. We now know the idea is completely false. Either god exists or god does not exist. One of those propositions must be wrong. If god's real, atheism is factually wrong. If not, then every religion is factually wrong. Historically science has been instrumental in finding the truth. Faith has been an impediment to finding the truth.

[tama]

17. Either-or

bivalent logic is certainly not the only logic. That bivalent logic (and law of the excluded middle and law if identity) is or should be only universal logic is not supported by evidence: also other logics are well attested and believing that bivalent logic is the only correct logic is... yup, a mere belief. :)

[SidneyCarton]

19. Don't you ever get tired of this?

Seriously? I get it, you're and Atheist and you're proud, and you're not going to go away, shut up or conform to the icky, awful Theists who are oppressing you. Great, it's a free country and all. You have the right to proclaim the nonexistence of God in the most strident terms you can find, and I have the right to find your opinion and arguments less than compelling.

But I wonder at the vehemence of your arguments, do you doubt the certainty of what you believe and need ongoing validation through the affirmation of your peers and endless strife with those who disagree? Or do you get paid by the "convert?" And if so, how is your approach working out for you? As a former missionary myself, I always wondered how the "believe what I do or you're an irrational idiot" approach worked.

[darkstar3]

28. Forgive us,

but sometimes, in order to be heard through the idiocy that permeates many of the so called scientific communities, those that actually speak the truth, unvarnished by wishful thinking or irrational and immovable positions, must shout.

IOW, when the faithful stop trying to corrupt the scientific method, in an attempt to twist science into something that confirms the unprovable nature of their faith, the mean atheists who just won't seem to leave you alone will finally find the peace in which to be silent.

[godlovesmeandnotyou]

29. Don't you ever get tired of this SidneyCarton?

Seriously? I get it, you're a Christian and you're proud, and you're not going to go away, shut up or conform to the icky, awful Atheists who are oppressing you. Great, it's a free country and all. You have the right to proclaim the existence of God in the most strident terms you can find, and I have the right to find your opinion and arguments less than compelling.

But I wonder at the vehemence of your disagreement, do you doubt the certainty of what you believe and need ongoing validation through the affirmation of your peers and endless strife with those who disagree? Or do you get paid by the "convert?" And if so, how is your approach working out for you? As a former Christian myself, I always wondered how the "believe what I do or you're scum deserving of intolerance, persecution, possibly torture and execution" approach worked.

[rd_kent]

31. Kick