News

**Luvapottamus**

Devout Agnostic Wrote:

encephaloid Wrote:
Atheism is not a religion and it's amusing how the original posts links the simple trait of Atheism to things that aren't shared by all atheists.
I wouldn't be against making it one, it would make things easier and religion enjoys all kinds of entitlements that those without religion do not, consider:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I92vQ0Nj4LA

That sounds personal. care to elaborate?

The title was bait. I was addressing the skeptic-enforced worldview of institutionalized science. I believe what we call "science" is inseparable from what is called atheism.

I don't think atheism and agnosticism are mutually exclusive.

Certainly a lot of atheists claim the scientific method as their belief system.

But not all.

And I'm personally not satisfied with the big bang. I think evolution has been well proven(I'd separate those two too) but I'm not satisfied that the big bang answers the question it supposedly addresses.

My dad is an atheist, but more of an adherent to stoicism as a philosophy than the scientific method.

**Devout Agnostic**

encephaloid Wrote:

Devout Agnostic Wrote:
encephaloid Wrote:
Atheism is not a religion and it's amusing how the original posts links the simple trait of Atheism to things that aren't shared by all atheists.
I wouldn't be against making it one, it would make things easier and religion enjoys all kinds of entitlements that those without religion do not, consider:

That sounds personal. care to elaborate?

The title was bait. I was addressing the skeptic-enforced worldview of institutionalized science. I believe what we call "science" is inseparable from what is called atheism.

Like Climate Change. I believe in Climate Change but not all Atheists do, I get you now though, carry on.

I dont really have strong opinions one way or the other on the issue of climate change. I've heard a lot of conflicting information, and im not well versed in any of the disciplines involved, but this is how i see it:

When a christian quotes from their bible as evidence that the world is ending because of our sinful nature, and that my only salvation is to share their worldview, I am skeptical. Why shouldn't I be skeptical when authority figures reference shaky data from soft sciences and tell me that mankind's shortsightedness is creating an extinction level catastrophe that requires increased coercive control of every domain of human activity to remedy?

**eyeseeall**

I'm not exactly satisfied with science is a view of consciousness either they have no explanation for the subjective experience I am viewing at this very moment. I'm pretty sure they will not be able to come up with an explanationanytime soon. I'm more apt to believe that science and religion go hand in hand eventually science will explain all of the paranormal activity involving the brain death the big bang the universe consciousness and any creator etc. I have experience things in my life that I know cannot be explained by science alone and I am not happy with atheisms view the life forms are nothing more than biological chemical machines. it does not jiv e with reality and everytime anyone may try to bring up the subject scientists and atheist are quick to come up with the some crack pot hair brained theory to quickly explain it away and change the subject because they know there is no explanation. U ntil they can figure that out I will remain a spiritual person.

**Ðґℙ☺ṧ⊥мαη**

LoP Guest Wrote:

Science may be full of falsehoods. But it is pretty usable. It made it possible for us to make computers and church buildings for example. So somewhere it seems to be right enough. And a second thing. Unlike religion, the scripture of science is not fixed in stone, it will change when we find better descriptions for the world around us.

It looks like they believe that thousands of years of putting them to
death can suddenly be erased by classifying them as one in the same.

And before someone claims that science is a religions tell me this: What
religion is self-correcting and even changes it's paradigm when the data
calls for that?

I'm a Deist, but I can imagine how atheists feel:

[Image: DA73_4F8E37B5.gif]

**Devout Agnostic**

DrPostman Wrote:

And before someone claims that science is a religions tell me this: What
religion is self-correcting and even changes it's paradigm when the data
calls for that?

I'm not claiming that science is a religion. The new emergent religion i perceive is a trinity of institutional science (perception control paradigm), pseudoskepticism (worldview enforcement) and atheism (traditional paradigm destruction). You've got priests, police, and military. Atheocracy. New Boss.

**sign7**

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

KAUFMAN v. McCAUGHTRY

James J. KAUFMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gary R. McCAUGHTRY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-1914.

-- August 19, 2005
Before BAUER, WOOD, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

James J. Kaufman, Jackson Correctional Institution, Black River Falls, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

"Wisconsin inmate James Kaufman filed this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming as relevant here that prison officials violated his First Amendment rights. He raises three unrelated issues. Of the three, the one that has prompted the issuance of this opinion is his claim that the defendants infringed on his right to practice his religion when they refused to allow him to create an inmate group to study and discuss atheism. .."

Verdict: Kaufman. Atheism = religion
Case closed.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1467028.html

**Ahriman**

There are 3 main branches of buddism. Three main branches of Islam. Christianity has a plethora of denominations. Hinduism has various forms. Hell you even have hassidic and reformed judaism....

I think you can all decide on a number of various 'atheist' sects.

lol

**eyeseeall**

sign11 Wrote:

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

KAUFMAN v. McCAUGHTRY

James J. KAUFMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gary R. McCAUGHTRY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-1914.

-- August 19, 2005
Before BAUER, WOOD, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

James J. Kaufman, Jackson Correctional Institution, Black River Falls, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

"Wisconsin inmate James Kaufman filed this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming as relevant here that prison officials violated his First Amendment rights. He raises three unrelated issues. Of the three, the one that has prompted the issuance of this opinion is his claim that the defendants infringed on his right to practice his religion when they refused to allow him to create an inmate group to study and discuss atheism. .."

Verdict: Kaufman. Atheism = religion
Case closed.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1467028.html

Thank you

**Luvapottamus**

eyeseeall Wrote:

sign11 Wrote:
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

KAUFMAN v. McCAUGHTRY

James J. KAUFMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gary R. McCAUGHTRY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-1914.

-- August 19, 2005
Before BAUER, WOOD, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

James J. Kaufman, Jackson Correctional Institution, Black River Falls, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

"Wisconsin inmate James Kaufman filed this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming as relevant here that prison officials violated his First Amendment rights. He raises three unrelated issues. Of the three, the one that has prompted the issuance of this opinion is his claim that the defendants infringed on his right to practice his religion when they refused to allow him to create an inmate group to study and discuss atheism. .."

Verdict: Kaufman. Atheism = religion
Case closed.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1467028.html

Thank you

I won't even bother to look up the decision.

**Truth**

Be an atheist, just don't be an asshole =)

**Luvapottamus**

Ahriman Wrote:

There are 3 main branches of buddism. Three main branches of Islam. Christianity has a plethora of denominations. Hinduism has various forms. Hell you even have hassidic and reformed judaism....

I think you can all decide on a number of various 'atheist' sects.

Just sew a P with a slash through it onto my sleeve.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvM-WQP7SOw

**Devout Agnostic** · (This post was last modified: 04-18-2012 06:24 AM by Devout Agnostic.)

Luvapottamus Wrote:

Devout Agnostic Wrote:
encephaloid Wrote:
Atheism is not a religion and it's amusing how the original posts links the simple trait of Atheism to things that aren't shared by all atheists.
I wouldn't be against making it one, it would make things easier and religion enjoys all kinds of entitlements that those without religion do not, consider:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I92vQ0Nj4LA

That sounds personal. care to elaborate?

The title was bait. I was addressing the skeptic-enforced worldview of institutionalized science. I believe what we call "science" is inseparable from what is called atheism.

I don't think atheism and agnosticism are mutually exclusive.

Certainly a lot of atheists claim the scientific method as their belief system.

But not all.

And I'm personally not satisfied with the big bang. I think evolution has been well proven(I'd separate those two too) but I'm not satisfied that the big bang answers the question it supposedly addresses.

My dad is an atheist, but more of an adherent to stoicism as a philosophy than the scientific method.

I suppose its inevitable that a discussion like this will occasionally get lost in the semantic labyrinth. agnosticism, atheism, science, and skepticism are all words with specific meanings that overlap to some degree, but to me this is an issue of identity. As a stoic, I imagine your dad wasnt terribly vocal about his internal positions? When I talk about atheists, im referring to people who identify as atheists, vocally. That's the evangelical aspect of this emergent religion. They are almost exclusively philosophy-of-science adherents in my experience, with at least a foot in what has been dubbed by critics as fundamental materialism, the scientist/atheist/skeptic trinity i referred to in my OP.

**Ðґℙ☺ṧ⊥мαη**

Devout Agnostic Wrote:

I'm not claiming that science is a religion. The new emergent religion i perceive is a trinity of institutional science (perception control paradigm), pseudoskepticism (worldview enforcement) and atheism (traditional paradigm destruction). You've got priests, police, and military. Atheocracy. New Boss.

What you are describing is government. Not science.

sign11 Wrote:

Verdict: Kaufman. Atheism = religion
Case closed.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1467028.html

Not really closed. You're using the courts who have found that cutting
off someone's porn or cable tv amounts to "cruel and unusual" punishment.

That's silly.

**Devout Agnostic**

DrPostman Wrote:

Devout Agnostic Wrote:
I'm not claiming that science is a religion. The new emergent religion i perceive is a trinity of institutional science (perception control paradigm), pseudoskepticism (worldview enforcement) and atheism (traditional paradigm destruction). You've got priests, police, and military. Atheocracy. New Boss.
What you are describing is government. Not science.

Totally. We're on the same page then.

**Luvapottamus** · (This post was last modified: 04-18-2012 06:30 AM by Luvapottamus.)

Devout Agnostic Wrote:

Luvapottamus Wrote:
Devout Agnostic Wrote:
That sounds personal. care to elaborate?

The title was bait. I was addressing the skeptic-enforced worldview of institutionalized science. I believe what we call "science" is inseparable from what is called atheism.

I don't think atheism and agnosticism are mutually exclusive.

Certainly a lot of atheists claim the scientific method as their belief system.

But not all.

And I'm personally not satisfied with the big bang. I think evolution has been well proven(I'd separate those two too) but I'm not satisfied that the big bang answers the question it supposedly addresses.

My dad is an atheist, but more of an adherent to stoicism as a philosophy than the scientific method.

I suppose its inevitable that a discussion like this will occasionally get lost in the semantic labyrinth. agnosticism, atheism, science, and skepticism are all words with specific meanings that overlap to some degree, but to me this is an issue of identity. As a stoic, I imagine your dad wasnt terribly vocal about his internal positions? When I talk about atheists, im referring to people who identify as atheists, vocally. They are almost exclusively philosophy-of-science adherents in my experience, with at least a foot in what has been dubbed by critics as fundamental materialism, the scientist/atheist/skeptic trinity i referred to in my OP.

I don't see any need for a taxonomy. Don't care if you create one, but it feels kinda icky to be asked to slip into a category.

chuckle

I'd rather not be classified, except when I use the words "atheist" or "agnostic" or "free-thinker" by choice, and it's usually to tell theists they have falsely described what "it must be like" to be me.

Heartflowers