The question is whether or not intolerance is intrinsic to the nature of atheism, or Christianity.

Vicious crimes have been committed in the name of Hinduism, yet Hindu is praised by most as a nonviolent belief system. Even Buddhist have murdered Hindu, Christians and Muslims in the name of their beliefs.

Is violence intrinsic to Buddhism? No. Is violence intrinsic to Hinduism? Or to Christianity? The fact that a Buddhist can remain a Buddhist without the need to kill non-Buddhists proves beyond any possibility of debate that Buddhism is not the cause of the violence. The same goes for Christianity, Hinduism and any other belief system.

A causal relationship between a theism and violence, or between atheism and violence, would preclude the possibility of nonviolent adherence.

(more…)

Redefining Atheism

Atheists have for some time wanted to redefine “atheism”. Let’s look at the accepted meanings of the word. A few definitions found via Google’s “Define” command:

The doctrine or belief that there is no God.

The belief that God does not exist.

A belief that there are no gods. Greek “a-theos”: without-god.

This word comes from two Greek words, a the negator, and theos, God. Atheism teaches that there is no God of any kind, anywhere, anytime.

These would be the standard, commonly accepted definitions of atheism. But hold up there a minute, there’s more. I’m a big fan of the OED. Let’s see what she has to say:

atheism: (from Greek atheos, “without God, denying God”) Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism).

You see there the seeds of the debate. The debate is “disbelief” versus “deny the existence of”.

(more…)

One of the biggest obstacles to worthwhile intellectual debate is the hopelessly dishonest and counterproductive framing of arguments.

(more…)

While reading Dawkins’ The God Delusion, I became more and more offended by the sheer arrogance and belligerence of Richard Dawkins. At first, I was all too willing to excuse it as a cultural thing. Maybe on that side of the pond, they just tend to sound arrogant.

(more…)

When I was a child, my parents encouraged us children to solve our differences with verbal sparring. If we wanted to get physical, they allowed that, too. (They were very laissez-faire.) But the preference was for verbal sparring based on formal logic.

We conducted this “fights” in front of witnesses (family) and the victor was declared when the opponent lost his cool and started calling names or cried. (Hey, we were kids. We cried.)

(more…)

“Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious. But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience. Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each.” -
The National Academy of Sciences

(more…)

Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively the pacifist is pro-Nazi. - George Orwell.

Sorry to say, there are very few intellectual defenses of pacifism. It’s just not practical, eh? Even Einstein clearly categorized pacifism as outside the realm of intellectual thought.

My pacifism is an instinctive feeling, a feeling that possesses me because the murder of men is abhorrent. My attitude is not derived from intellectual theory but is based on my deepest antipathy to every kind of cruelty and hatred. - Albert Einstein

Add This Blog to Technorati Favorites

A Book Review

How the Pro-Choice Movement Saved America - Freedom, Politics and the War on Sex by Cristina Page

“Devastating. This book exposes the anti-woman, anti-family, anti-American, and anti-democratic goals of the far right’s true agenda.” - Roseanne Barr

With glowing reviews from such intellectual giants as Roseanne Barr, how could I not spent a paltry $11.70 to enlighten myself?

(more…)