I see three massive flaws in your argument.

1. You judge the morality of atheist behaviour on the basis of religious dogma.
2. You believe atheists 'arrive' at atheism. They don't - they are born like that.
3. No evidence for any notable difference between the morality of 'silent atheists' and 'anti-Christian' or 'political atheists' that backs up this distinction.

3. No evidence for any notable difference between the morality of 'silent atheists' and 'anti-Christian' or 'political atheists' that backs up this distinction.

1. I do not judge the morality of atheist behviour on the basis of religious dogma. Morality is discoverable within the history of humanity. Normative morality makes itself evident on the basis of societies and political groups who have lived throughout history. I don't know the bible but I can usually tell right from wrong. Furthermore I take it as an admition of guilt on your part, that you recognize the phenomena of immorality that atheists generally embrace.

2. I don't see how one can be born an atheist. Plenty of people who were born into Christianity have later changed their position.

3. The difference between political, revolutionary atheists and silent atheists is the fact that the one is political and the other is indifferent. The hypothetical 'silent atheist' arrives at his position through theological investigation while the political atheist is an activist who does not see the need for an actual investigation into whether or not there is a God.

Your citing the 'thrall of sex' makes it pretty clear you DO judge within that basis. I certainly embrace that thrall as often as I can.

I didn't say 'born into'. I said 'born'. As people, we are not born worshipping Christ. We have to be taught (or indoctrinated) to do that.

I never understand why religious people have such a hard time understanding the fact that atheists generally have not reached atheism as a conclusion to some theological consideration. For all the atheists I know, myself included, faith is a non-issue that can, always has been and probably always will be ignored. Have you reached the conclusion that your mind isn't being controlled by little invisible people called Dorangs living in each of your brain cells after some extensive Dorangian investigation? Will you now I've brought it up? Or for a less jokey example, try scientology (less jokey, but not much). For a lot of atheists theology, scientology and Dorangy are equivilent in terms of worthwhile pursuits.

Pusyphus,

I am not saying that there aren't some atheists who have genuinely studied the matter and have fairly come to the conclusion that there is not God. These I have respectfully called 'silent atheists'. I am speaking here rather of those who hide their political and social support for basic immorality under the label of atheism. They use atheism as a kind of "get-out-of-responsibility-for-free" card. As long as Christianity is an evil in their minds they can do anything they please, there is no lowest point of human depravity for them.

wow........

So I guess I have to ask, if your saying that atheism can be a scape goat. If so, of course. Anything can be used for negativity. So, are you implying that atheism is generally negative?


Also I would like to state for the philosophy forum record that I am not an atheist. I believe in no religion. I believe in no spiritual structure. Besides myself.

Pusyphus,

I am not saying that there aren't some atheists who have genuinely studied the matter and have fairly come to the conclusion that there is not God. These I have respectfully called 'silent atheists'. I am speaking here rather of those who hide their political and social support for basic immorality under the label of atheism. They use atheism as a kind of "get-out-of-responsibility-for-free" card. As long as Christianity is an evil in their minds they can do anything they please, there is no lowest point of human depravity for them.

No, there is one notch lower, I'm afraid. That is using the flag of one god, to go and sodomize another country waving a different flag of the same cowardly god, in the name of justice.

So, what's wrong with some good ol' fashioned depravity? It beats shady behavior under god by a mile.

Just so you know, these anti-theists I mentioned, they have studied the situation, and have concluded that there is indeed a god. They just recognize that the god must be trash, and that the god's believers are zombies who have sold out on humanity.

Why would you call me a liar. You are being unfair. I urge you to keep the tone a little higher. The overemphasis upon human sexuality usually takes place within historically decadent epochs. This is a simple observation without any metaphysical or theological presuppositions.

As I said, I don't see how people can be born atheists. What is the scientific basis of such a claim?

You didn't read my post carefullly enough. We know that atheists don't reach their conclusion upon the basis of theological inquiry, I've already said this. In fact, that was my main point. Atheism is a pollitical tool for decadent behaviour that doesn't have to understand itself.
--

Well, I would agree. Don't be surprised if we continue to go to war with others countries.

So, if we are losing our standing as political agents, what do you suggest?

There are so many ways to start and so many different areas to work with. However, I don't believe that ultimately we can prevent the demise of the Western world. I see we are slowly descending into third world status in America (shrinking middle class, growing poor at the bottom, and super rich at the top).

The one thing I would suggest is that we attempt to shrink the size of government in order to arrest the decline. But this, as you may know, would be a difficult task with many obstacles.

What we can do as thinkers and knowledge seekers is to continuously discuss the matter and not forget the path that we are on, and to understand why we are where we are. Try to keep ourselves whole while the whole world around us seems to be losing its collective mind as we careen out of control here.

-

I feel the argument against atheists is that when they sin they do it without the fear of eternal hell but when the faithful sin they know they are going to burn..The opposite could be said when atheists do good they do it for its own sake, the faithful have salvation and heaven.......Whats this political animal the" political atheists" have i over slept? who created them?

Why dont we exterminate the atheist politicians with no morals and leave the religious politicians like Bush, what a wonderful world we would have..

But my point is that one does not have to be Christian in order to understand what human immorality looks like. Plato and Aristotle, for example, were not Christian yet they were highly ethical.

Of course, Christians can act immorally just like any other humans or group of humans.

--