Everyone believes they are right =_= don't they? however, Believers know they are right. -_-

Knowledge is defined as justified true belief ( by Plato), i think it is a plausible definition until now.Not all beliefs of others are made unreasonably, of course i don't support "oppressive religious group" either lol


Oh, a typical interpretation of people about Karl Marx 's quote. This guy here offers a broader view for what Marx really meant...
Hope that clarifies some points...
Finally

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic" as soon as i understand what an agnostic is

i started the 12th page

________________

Ok, first I didn't get were did you find the typical interpretation of Carl Marx quote, I didn't even find were aneste intepreted it, she just said that she agrees with it.
Second religion is not a sympthom, sympthoms don't harm the body on their own, sympthoms don't spread on their own. When we look on religion it spreads like a plague with it's sick ideas. My country till 16 century had no idea of witch hunting most of them were pagans, but then christianity comes and suddenly the fires from burning witches lighted up the country side. Strange thing isn't it for sympthoms to spread the sicknes of society itself.
Sure in the begining religion is only a sympthom, that's the reason why in christianity there are so many elements of paganism, but every religion one day gains the mind of it's own.

________________
"Computer games don't affect kids....
I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
/Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc, 1989

So you believe religion is a disease?

For most cases I consider it just an atavism, a meaningless annoying thing from the past that's doomed to disapear at some part of our evolution.
But sometimes it degenarates to something more horrible then then a simple atavism, and those forms, yes, I consider a disease.

________________
"Computer games don't affect kids....
I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
/Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc, 1989

So what do you believe about things like Buddhism? People who aren't Atheists but aren't part of any organized religion. And even so
simply due to how widespread it is and how many fanatics there are I dont think its possibly for religion to disappear. It is also impossible for Atheism to disappear. Of course this is all imo

People have been killed in the name of Budhism as in the name of any other religion. Funny isn't it? In Tibets history there are plenty of bloody moments when budhists have wiped out shamans, or even more ironic, other budhists (indian budhists, while fighting for power, attacked chinese budhists and sloughtered them).
People who believe in some kind of higher power in the end believe in god. Trying to differ them from people who belong to organized religions would be like dividing nazis who killed people because they believed it was right and people who commited crimes because Hitler said them to. There is no real difference between such beliefs. If you believe or listen to a higher power you acknowledge it, so they are just as believers as any person going to church every day and praying for house in havay and big boobed girlfriend.
In wealthy countries atheists have been growing in numbers and judging how technologies advance our living standart should only rise (exccept africa, but nobody knows for sure what's gona happen to those war addicts). So logicaly thinking the better we will be off and the less poor people there will be, the less believers there will be. And I'm not even talking about scientifical progress that might completly detroy any theories religious people have produced to prove gods existance. We don't believe in god who drives through skies in his chariot and throws thunders at us, do we?

________________
"Computer games don't affect kids....
I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
/Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc, 1989

You should understand something before agreeing with it, and you should interpret it before you can understand. In this case, it is a typical interpretation when you agree with a small portion (that typically is agreed) of a not so small idea, i don't mean to offend anyone. That is just simple deduction....

And about whether that religion is a symptom or a disease,yeah you can choose to treat it as a disease, or an atavism o_o I have no problem with it, lol however i think, your definition of religion is too negative while obviously there are a more open and positive notion, for instance, the other guy in that atheism website looked at it in a very different way from you.
Are you sure that people who believe in some kind of higher power always acknowledge it with out reasoning ?(and thus they are the same as religious believers ? lol) or are you sure about what you mean by "higher power" ? o,O is it the belief of "there 's no higher power" ?
I think it s also good to believe in such thing, because the practical results of one's belief reflect in one's life, and they are what matter the most.
We don't have to believe in any "higher power" just because there are some geniuses who tried discover the laws of the universe did believe, or just because our technology today might be (very likely) developed by such "believers". It's not like when you have the same belief with them you can have the same talent.
For short, people who believe in something that makes their life and others life progress positively in their society should be respected, religious or not. And if you always look at the most negative proofs possible and think they are the only ones that ever exist you can prove the otherwise.



________________

That's simplified deduction. Practicaly you are usuming that aneste is completly clueless about the quote she is using, because she only posted the quote, not articel. So next time I should post a huge scientifical study to prove you that I do understand what I'm talking about?



Well sure there are many people who have more positiv opinion about religion like those people who go around blowing themselves up. But have no fear, I do find some parts of religion ok, like how easily it is possible to control the masses with it, in a situation when it is neccery to unite people against an outer enemy religion is as useful as any other ideology (like when in Rome Christianity became official religion) and sometimes even neccecery. An army believing in reward after death is more likely to fight till the bitter end, while even radical nationalists would think twice before dying in a meaningless death.



Many people who belong to organized religion also hold some kind of reasoning why god exists (you know - the age of moon, the dinosaurs in bible e.t.). So it's also not a real difference between such persons.
I don't mean anything by "higher power" 1)I don't believe it exists, 2)Truthfully speaking I don't care. If you want to learn more about it ask ExzyruSxxx, who was the first to shoot out such idea in this topic.



I don't really understand what you wanted to say with this. Could you rephrase it, please.

________________
"Computer games don't affect kids....
I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
/Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc, 1989

As an atheist, I'm exempt from the consequence of going to hell.... of course, I'm also exempt from going to heaven. Guess I'll just vanish into nothingness. Oh well, better live it up till I disappear.

________________
What's yours is mine, and what's mine is STILL mine!!

lol that still seems a bit negative

No, it's is higly logical and the way how the
executive board sees and uses it.
It simply lacks the idealistic fluff.

That is a matter of point of view

________________

No, i don't expect that much, one or two sentences should be enough for a rough summary, it makes a difference ...>,> and i don't mean clueless by saying typical. Though i start to regret saying the word typical, perhaps i should use a different adjective -_-"


I know my English is weird ... Basically,how one's belief affects one's surroundings (family, society) is what matters the most, and if the overall effect is positive (by the other individuals' judgment) i can respect him. If others - who have the same belief - affect their society the same way, the effect is stable during a long enough period and its negativeness is only caused by a minority, that belief should be respected.
It can be applied for any belief, but only about respectability, whether a belief can become "knowledge" or not depends on different factors and may not take that much time.

________________

rather than atheist i'd really rather be secular, just abstaining from all forms of religious belief

and someone, somewhere in this thread spelt Karl Marx wrong

3rd option.

I have my beliefs, they have theirs. People are allowed to believe in what they like.

It's the ones that try to convert others that annoy me, and that's in any aspect.