What, in your opinion, were the bad points? I disagreeed with none of the points made.

Good post, fl. Thanks.

Should be compulsory veiwing for all God-botherers.

Athiests with an agenda are just as fucked in the head as religious nuts with an agenda. Shut your fucking mouth and let me make a decision. Hardcore Athieism is as much a religion/cult as Baptism or Catholicism.

A christian cannot prove there is a god anymore than an athiest can prove there isn't.

My 'agenda' is to be left the fuck alone. This includes political decisions made at the behest of a religion that end up effecting me.

I could care less about proving anything. Why the fuck are god-botherers so intent on doing so and being defensive about it?

And the athiests, too.

I don't believe in god, but that is my decision alone. Why all the derision torward those who do ? The majority of religious folk lead lives of quiet deperation, and bother nobody.

^ Agreed.
Unfortunately, the vocal minority who try to run the world fuck it up for the rest of us, religious or not. That is why we must ALL care about religion and the activities of all religious people, of whatever creed.

How about somone make a list of all the Athiests that have flown planes into buildings or run into a room with a bomb strapped to their midsection.

Short list aint it.

It is pretty simple folks, How about I make it even simpler for people to understand.

I am an athiest. I am a good person, I treat people fairly, justly and kindly
without the need for the threat of tourture descriptions of hell, Or the promise of gifts, virgins or pleasures of heaven.

Yet for all the good I do, No matter how kind, giving or loving to my fellow man I will burn in the lake of fire and be tortued by demons for all eternity becuase I had neither fear or greed in my heart to do so. Because I did good things because it is the right thing to do.

I have never needed jesus, allah or abraham in my pocket to do right .

Yet in this demon fearing world. I am the least trusted, and my rights and views are suspect under our current leadership. But so are anyone who thinks for themselves.

How about somone make a list of all the Athiests that have flown planes into buildings or run into a room with a bomb strapped to their midsection.

The fuck? Ok I guess we could start with every communist leader (Stalin, for one). I think the issue at hand is that some people are ASSHOLES. Some are religious assholes, some are other types of asshole.

As Jon Stewart said, extremists run the world because the rest of us have shit to do.

^ You are an inspiration to us all - but you're putting the cart before the horse. The political extremists who act in the name of religion would use another name if religion did not serve their purpose. And yes, the true believers (like you) are destined to be shat upon in this world.

(damn, nocal, you beat me to the punch)

A christian cannot prove there is a god anymore than an athiest can prove there isn't.
That there is no proof weighs more heavily on it not existing, logically. That is to say, if you -had- to choose.

Hardcore Athieism is as much a religion/cult as Baptism or Catholicism.
With the exception that Christian organizations are organized powerhouses and by sheer determination and money can out speak and out power many larger groups (In the USA, of course).

It's important not to get athiests and secularists mixed up: anti-religion vs. non-religion.
What the movie points out that is important is that the nation isn't as secular as it pretends to be sometimes. Having a statement like 'under god' is using specific Judeo-Christian nomenclature and has an impact on athiests just as much as Buddhists, Indians, and so forth. Though, Nocal is right in that religion can be used as an excuse to be an asshole just as anti-religion or non-religion can. In fact, some people are assholes for no particularly good reason.

I have never been defensive about proving there is no god. Probably because I know I'm right. I don't deny that there are some people who are fanatics about it, but fuck them anyway. Like solion said (great post btw), name one of these types that has flown a plane into a building to prove there is no god.

The only one I could think of off the top of my head is the jackass from California that tried to screw with the pledge a while ago. He's not even violent. He's more annoying than anything. I would rather have a thousand of him than one of the current crop of violent religious/backwards/controlling shitheads.

Gyst:That there is no proof weighs more heavily on it not existing, logically. That is to say, if you -had- to choose.

That makes no fukin sense whatsoever.

Neither does this.

Gyst:That there is no proof weighs more heavily on it not existing, logically. That is to say, if you -had- to choose.

That is to say, if there is no proof that something does exist, and no proof that something doesn't, it's more likely that it doesn't. Occam's Razor and probably something fancier.

Atheists can be just as condescending as any religious fanatic. Whatever your particular stance on the existance/non-existance of god is, believers and non-believers alike invariably develop a certain smugness about their views--believing that they possess some special insight into the nature of the universe that others are missing out on. This is unfortunate, and not really helpful to anyone.

As for myself, I don't believe in god, but I don't begrudge anyone the right to believe in a creator, if that is what fulfils them personally. I also think that the majority of churchgoers are earnest in their beliefs, and probably most lead decent, moral lives.

My only concern--and it's a big one--is for my children, who will grow up and live in an increasingly religiously polarized and intolerant world. Will they grow to put their faith in a religion which, while avowing morality and inclusiveness, is at its heart commanding servile obedience, with the threatened price for defiance being eternal damnation at the hands of devils and spirits? Or will they embrace skepticism, rational thought and the scientific method as their criteria for belief? Obviously I hope it is the latter, but I will not force my philosophy on them. Instead it is my hope to infuse them with the foundations of critical thought and reason--to give them to the tools they need to judge objectively for themselves what makes sense in their lives. I consider this to be one of the most important responsibilities--perhaps the most important--I've been given as a parent.

Arthur C. Clarke said it best:

'I would defend the liberty of consenting adult creationists to practice whatever intellectual perversions they like in the privacy of their own homes; but it is also necessary to protect the young and innocent.'