And new atheism is the view that "religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises"
Atheism isnt simply " no religion" all the time, and thats what im saying

Well it was just weird that you repeatedly distinguishing between Athiesm and "no religion" when they're the same thing

And the reason it matters is because it seems that a lot of politicians struggle to separate their faith from their politics, especially with the Republican party

I'm sure if God is too bothered by it he will strike us down.

that post is extremely offensive.
Religious people get offended by things that you just said.
I would NEVER say that about someone elses religion like that

I think what you mean to say is,is that Atheism is a cult.

Offensive to who? You seem to be getting offended for other people.

ME.
I AM CHRISTIAN.
I dont get offended by Other religions/ beliefs etc
BUT I DO GET OFFENDED when people have the audacity to put down another persons religion like that

Maybe if you had had stronger faith you wouldn't be offended? Are you starting to doubt?

true.
Sorry if im being confusing but I'm talking about a certain type of atheism, mostly people who are part of the new atheism movement

its pretty pathetic what your doing right now.
I hope your proud you did something I would never stoop to - Insulting someone elses religious beliefs

It's not. Religion deserves no respect. Those are my views and you'll just have to deal with them.

do you think your beliefs deserve respect?
Think about that.
Because you sir, just made a very hypocritical statement

They are just my beliefs, it's up to people if they respect them or not. They don't "deserve" anything.

Then why did you say religion does NOT "deserve" respect?
How come people can choose to respect YOUR opinion but then you say religion deserves no respect?
:nono:

Because Religion isn't some white fluffy cloud is it? Most Religious History is written in blood.

I see absolutely no reason why religion deserves respect. What, because some people are really fond of it and it makes them feel good?

As an atheist, I don't respect religion because of it's thousands of years of providing divine mandate for barbarism. Now religion seems to be the primary motivating force in the idea that ignorance is just as good as knowledge.

You can worship fairy tales in private and I won't care. The problem is that these fairy tales make bold claims about the natural world that people use to live by, vote by, and judge by. All of our biggest failures as a civilization(rape, torture, slavery, mass murder) are encouraged by countless religious texts, as well as commanded by the deities within them. The Bible says it's okay to take slaves, rape women, kill children, commit genocide, etc. It's disturbing that most Christians don't want to acknowledge this fact, yet they want to claim that the Bible is indeed the irrefutable word of God. I guess most Christians only like God when it applies to what they wan't to believe.

Besides, the healthiest nations in the world on the Human Development Index are the nations with the most atheists(like Norway and Japan). As nations rank lower on the HDI, the percentage of the population that is religious increases.

Well, in a democratic republic you are electing someone to represent your views in the government. If your views are christian then obviously you'd be more inclined to vote for a christian. Obviously the US is a majority christian country, and that probably won't be changing anytime soon, as the population is becoming more and more Latino, and Latinos tend to be very conservative catholic.

There have been some presidents that were probably atheist or agnostic, like Jefferson and Lincoln, but they still obviously needed to convince people they would represent a christian view point for them while in office and assure them that christian values would not be discriminated against and so would pander to christians a bit.

Duh? I don't think anyone was unaware of this. The problem that is being pointed out is that these people waste time and stifle progress by voting in politicians who are dedicated to bringing us back to the 1950's.

I don't agree that the Latino population has anything to do with the kinds of religious infiltration in politics this country is dealing with. The Latino population is not really in favor of the GOP because of their stance on immigration and other issues that effect the Latino communities. The GOP is mostly favored in sections of the country where the white population vastly outnumbers all others. Also, the GOP caters to a lot of denominations that hate Catholics(i.e. Latino's).

I never said Latino's necessarily vote for the GOP (although there is a strong support for the GOP in the Cuban community more than other Latinos), i'm saying though that Democratic candidates also have to advertize their christianity to appeal to the Latino voters, that's why all of the Dem candidates are christian too and that's why even the Dems don't openly support gay marriage yet, even though you know deep down they do. I think if the Dems did nominate an athiest candidate you would see a lot of Latinos flock to the GOP, it would be a godsend (no pun intended) to the Republicans.

Isn't it a rather contradiction in terms to be saying in one breath that you don't hold any blame for others not liking Atheism, then in the next breath quote how unfair it is to tell people what they shouldn't believe in? :conf2:

You are also quite incorrect in your statement over the Catholics. Their church does not allow their followers to preach this Religion.

And by the way- Science DOES prove there is no God/s . If you are insulted by others opines and beliefs then do it quietly. We are as much within our right to voice and debate as any other 'faction'

Bizarrely the current president is an atheist but cannot say so. read some of his literature prior to deciding to run for election...

Science has not proven that God doesn't exist, it would be impossible to do so because God doesn't have a definition. God means a million things to a million people. God means the sun to some religions, God means the Earth to some religions, God means extraterrestrial beings to some religions.

If you can't even define what God means, then how can you prove that it does or does not exist?

I think you know exactly what I refer to. So, since we are getting down to picking bones...

I did not state that I can prove that God does not exist. I said science could.

God is a theoretical entity that is postulated by theists to explain various phenomena, such as the origin of the universe, the design of the universe, and the origin of living things. Modern science, however, can explain all of these phenomena without postulating the existence of God.

1. In the words of Laplace, science has no need of that hypothesis.
2 By demonstrating that God is not needed to explain anything, science has proven that there is no more reason to believe in the existence of God than to believe in the existence of phlogiston, the luminiferous ether, or Vulcan.

This may explain why more than 90% of the world's top scientists disbelieve or doubt the existence of God.

Scientists prefer natural explanations to supernatural ones, not because of any metaphysical bias on their part, but because natural explanations produce more understanding than supernatural ones. As Plato realized, to say that God did it is not to explain anything, but simply to offer an excuse for not having an explanation.

Hope this doesn't baffle you with science...too much. ;)

Wow, what a disgustingly patronizing thing to say. Shame on you.

You don't understand people. You don't take culture into account at all, and that is why atheists fail.

Atheists fail to realize that religion is not just about explaining the world and explaining the physical plane, it's also about communities and cultures. It's sociological and psychological as well.

No shame. Lostlex. It isn't my problem when you fail to denote a light hearted comment, ending with a *wink*

As for you character assessment on me. I am entitled to say what I think...without that character assessment turning into an an assasination from you. I'm happy to debate, maturely, but on that score, your opines are of no consequence to me