EDIT:
What I learned from this thread.
the religious: We don't give a fuck! We're goin' to Heaven to chill with Jesus t('-'t) ALL OF YOU SHOULD BELIEVE OUR SHIT, OR BURN IN HELL! We are unstable shitheads who will NOT HESITATE TO KILL YOU if you don't convert immediately goddamn HEATHENS. How can you not believe in G-d? He exists. here's proof: He exists! Infallible, bitch. Evolution is a LIE OF THE DEVIL!
atheists: We are the only people capable of thinking clearly. Religion causes all wars! Abolish religion and all of our problems are solved! Logic over emotion, ethics are for suckers! Dissect animals, experiment on humans (as long as they're dumb and unskilled!) Let the elite come live in our mansions, as the proles wallow in their own filth. We're so fuckin' smart and clear thinking we don't understand different people's viewpoints HOW RAD ARE WE!?
o.0
Well for the religious part, the second to the last one happened. Yea, if a group of theist are doing public good. They aren't really doing it for the public good. They are doing it for themselves. The motivation is selfish. That not a bad thing. It should be recognized and be kept in check.
I been in this thread from the get go, and I don't think we've really said that. Those christian/religious exist. I've encounter one. But that not the reason to deny their god or any god. It doesn't help.
The atheist part. Yea, we are thinking clearer. A god person is a delusion as are lots of claims of any religion. Delusion are bad. I don't think the stance of the thread is that religion caused all wars. It caused some. And has been used as a motive for lots of conflicts. Its not the sole cause.
Now the last bits is a YMMV. Myself, is that emotion should be tempered by logic. I have a good set of ethics and morals. I don't get why logic and no emotion would mean no ethics. Maybe you didn't mean to say that those things followed. Yea, sure dissect animals. And experiments on humans. I'm more for by consent and oversight. I would really like for a few links about elitism from the entire thread.
There are no fundamentals or dogma for atheism. Just because one atheist says it, doesn't mean that it applies to all. At most you can say that on atheist thinks that.
I'll admit, I don't understand the need for a god person. Like they don't understand the reason to not have one. I've entertained it. It lacks substances. Most atheist will probably agree, that using religion as a motive for anything doesn't make any sense. It doesn't matter what the action is. The religious motives for working in a soup kitchen are equally inane as blowing yourself up. It all started up from unsubstantiated actions, rewards and punishments.
Double post because I know most of you will stop reading halfway through my last post, and then reply with a question/statement that I already covered in the post.
If morals come from the individual, not from the religion (which I believe, because yes Atheists have morals too!), then why can't you let an individual be an individual? Why can't you just let people be there own? You may reply "Well, religious people don't let US be!", well the majority do.
There are a lot of people who will try to get you to convert, but most people won't. Most of the atheists in this thread seem to be trying to get people to turn away from religion, whereas a lot of the religious people I see posting are coming from the viewpoint "Well, I don't really care what you believe, but I'm going to believe in G-d". This is what I see on every forum I find people debating the subject. The atheists come out and scream "But it's wrong, and it's stupid! You have no proof! Just be an atheist like the smart people!" While the religious ones say "Welp, I believe what I believe, and you're not really gonna change that"
This is a complete contradiction to the atheist viewpoint that "We don't try and FORCE others to subscribe to our beliefs, THEY do".
Why can't people just get along?
We contained our atheism in the thread of the atheism. They've come into the thread and state their belief, we ask for substantiation, they don't have any. Intellectual honest says that it should be dropped.
The stance of 'It works for me, and that what matter.' Doesn't follow through. If someone used that to justify eating babies, no one would be like 'Well that shouldn't be challenged. It works for him, that what matters.' Its not logically sound defense of any belief.
If beliefs can be wrong.
And you shouldn't believe in wrong things.
Then you should strive to believe in the least of wrong things.
And because minds are hard to change, doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried. Some minds are lost. And then you aren't debating them for the TBer but for those reading.
The majority do not let atheist be.
Least trusted minority.
Religious clause in state stuffs.
Its annoyingly on my money.
We're surround by it.
Most atheist aren't anti theist. I'm not. I'm not all in favor of religious abolishment. I'm not much in favor of promoting human secularism or atheism. I'm for crit. thinking.