Still An Atheist

 I don't have any objection to people believing in god, if they must have mental "crutches" because a lot of them keep it to themselves.  It might even be a good way to be, because if you can blame god, you don't have to take responsibility for your own actions.  I can't exactly respect it, but as long as I'm allowed to turn a blind eye to it, I am prepared to for the sake of peace and quiet.  

We'll always have wars - there's always some excuse, not necessarily for ideals - so I don't single out religion to blame for that.  No, my main beef with religion, apart from the hysterical crazies, is the amount of money religious institutions extort from poor saps who believe they will go to hell if they don't part with their worldly goods before they're done with them.   On several occasions I've done work for a Christian charity (C of E) and had to bite my tongue, I was so shocked by the waste, the luxury, being funded out of donations from impoverished pensioners.  Talk about squandering!  (If you want to get into the priest racket, here's a tip: The poor are always good for a handout.  Far more generous than the rich) Deep pile carpets, the best new furniture.  A trolley of cream cakes went around at teatime - free to all office workers, who had tea and coffee on tap all day long.  And at the end of the day the leftovers went to waste.  

Then of course there's the Catholics - no need to explain my disgust with the goings on there.  (Sex is wicked - unless you're a priest with a whole choir of little boys to select from!)  Muslims - Jews again no need.  Their leaders might set themselves up one against the other but apart from the costumes they've all got the same drive to spiritually dominate in order to extort money.  

I object to the unwholesomeness, the lack of moral integrity, the divorce from reason and the way the little ***** insert themselves into every important scientific debate, putting the brakes on legitimate progress.  And the way their greedy little hands are always open, wanting funding for this, exemptions from that.  No point ranting.  Being a priest - it's the oldest profession

deleted deleted
8 Responses Mar 5, 2010

I do understand Christianity, most atheists do, its why we reject it.<br />
We reject the concept of human sacrifice.<br />
We reject the concept of sin.<br />
We recoil at the idea that our children are vile filthy things until a priest sprinkles them with water.<br />
We renounce the idea that man needs a god once it has been explained to him where thunder comes from.<br />
We loath your thought process in wondering if victims are sent to hell i.e. mitigating factors.<br />
We hate that you will teach children that the author of the just war philosophy is a saint, the blood thirsty Joan of arc, a saint, the tyrannical Torqemada an example for young Catholics.<br />
We stand stupefied as your divine organization flouts its wealth while its followers languish in poverty, cringe as its doctrines expose its members to aids and increase the population of the world with homeless babies.<br />
We understand your Christianity all to well and along with its vile compatriots, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Protestantism. We vow to expose them for the corrupt and loathsome things they are.<br />
By the way, I have read your catechism, might I suggest you read Why I am not a Christian by Bertrand Russell.

You don’t understand Christianity if you think a crucifixion as both God and man was trifling or meaningless, or that Christianity is not a difficult religion. When I speak of Christianity I speak of the true Catholic Church, not bread-and-water versions of Christianity. The Church emphasizes that Christ was both God and man (remember God can do anything), which meant he suffered just as humans do. He was crucified in real time and felt it with human flesh, and he died as a human (while remaining God). We’re not supposed to fully comprehend it.<br />
You say being an eagle scout is more difficult than being a saint? That’s absolutely ridiculous. You grossly misunderstand the meaning of the word then. To be a saint is to fight a heroic and daily battle against deeply rooted temptations to sin. It means self-denial, profound humility, complete charity for others and wholehearted love for God. Almost constant prayer (it does not come easily), sacrifice, and suffering is what it takes to be a saint. It encompasses SO much more than the ten commandments, or rather, the ten commandments encompass a whole lot more than you think. And you truly don’t understand the meaning of virtue if you think it must be demonstrated with great public deeds.<br />
If you think I or the Church do not view the sex scandals as horrific and disgusting then think again. The men who make up the Church are imperfect and make mistakes, and quite unfortunately some are corrupt. That is not a function of the religion, it is the corrupt men who have infiltrated the Church. Certainly bishops and priests have mishandled at least some cases, but you must understand it isn’t a tribunal and in uncertain circumstances it may be inadequate to pass judgment on priests. But the main point is, you seem unable to separate the concepts of Church doctrine and Church members. True enough, the men of the Church are largely responsible for hatred/rejection of it and for that I am sorry and I can understand why ignorant people would then reject it. I would then encourage you and other Church-haters to come to a better understanding of the beautiful teachings of Christ and the saints, but then again an unclean heart will be blind to its value.<br />
To address your last point, there are mitigating factors in sin, including suicide, and sexual abuse (in addition to young age and immaturity) is surely a big one. So no, they’re probably not going to hell. But it’s not for us to determine. By the way, I would consult the Catechism of the Church before throwing out judgments about it and its teachings.

Aaah, according to the myth, jesus was god incarnate, so never did he feel his death would be anything but a temporary state, in fact, as jesus was purported to be the god of the OT he was by its own nature in full knowledge of the future. He knew he would die and then rise, further if you take the myth of god to its omega, you would be forced to say christ ( god) could never die as gods cant die, so at best you could only say the jesus was inconvenianced for your sins.<br />
Why would you call christianity hard to follow? Its tenanats are no more challenging then membership in the masons or the Moose lodge. I would go on to say that becoming an eagel scout takes more gumption then any saint or messiah has had to muster in 2000 years sans the bloodshed.<br />
Thank you also for being one of the first in our little atheist corner to attempt to minimize the child rape horror down to a "few" priests and an overworked Pontiff. I am also very happy to learn of the superlative joy the victims will receive once they die, might I assume that their gospel is "Hang in there baby" BTW, the children who killed themselves due to the rapes, are they damned for suicide or do you think the pope might intervine on thier behalfs?

To chocoloco: First, it is not the Catholic Church who is “doing damage” in Africa—AIDS has been propogated by nature and by human choice there. The Church cannot remedy a problem with something it holds to be morally wrong, something which demeans sex by preventing the full giving of oneself, by preventing the opportunity to give life. <br />
To call the Church’s behavior in the sex abuse scandal part of a “cover up” gravely mischaracterizes its real attitude towards the abuse. The church—notwithstanding the few corrupt priests who infiltrate it—condemns such behavior as the general public does. The pope often cannot be in a position to pass judgment on accusations, thus leaving it to subordinate bishops, etc, but in especially grave cases with substantial proof, he has removed priests. He wants to be careful not to malign the reputation of an innocent priest, which does happen. So they handle these accusations with discretion, but do not prevent the bringing of these accusations to civil authorities, who can take on these cases with a full effort. The Church has so many other duties of great moral/spiritual importance (in its eyes and mine). <br />
For what matters are we “desperate” for God to take responsibility? The mistake is not the dependence of the believer but the pride of the unbeliever. It is much harder, in fact, to trust all matters to God than to take them on oneself. I know from experience. I wonder a little that atheists can see the great majority of people in human history as “dupes,” while the atheists remain a small minority.<br />
To Godfree: I would not trust most people to faithfully follow a religion with a difficult doctrine. Christianity is such a religion. The minority who do really faithfully follow it are great examples of holiness, love and self-sacrifice. The judgment should not be based merely on the actions of so-called “followers” but on their actions’ congruity with a doctrine they consciously try to follow. The misdeeds of Christians are blatantly against the religion itself, so one cannot judge Christianity by their sins. <br />
I can understand that you and many others would question the goodness of a God who allows such terrible suffering in the world. But this is where the cross comes in. Jesus Christ suffered an excruciating death on the cross not only to atone for our sins but to exalt the role of suffering on Earth. While sin remains, suffering has great value for atonement when mystically united to Christ’s suffering. The reward in heaven is much greater than we can possibly imagine. Remember our sin is the ultimate cause of suffering, and God merely turns it to a greater good.

editorial licence my dear chocoloco.<br />
Of course the leaders and followers are to blame but so to are the members of the public at large ( not a rap group).<br />
When reporting the news of the universal church's rape of children why does the media refrain from asking "where was god" When Muslims try to blackmail a television cartoon because it dares picture their prophet why don't the headlines scream "we don't believe"<br />
Religion is a cancer that must be treated. I am aware that many will choose to live with the cancer, their choice. But the rest of us must be inoculated from it. We must not cower to its mythical founders, give its publications credence nor attempt to reconcile it with science.

If one can't base ones opinions of a religion on the misdeeds of its members, what right do we have to praise it for the good deeds of same said members?<br />
All doctrines sound good on paper but the followers all screw it up, The Communis Manifesto, Mein Kumph, Science and health with a key to the scriptures, Dianetics and the list goes on.<br />
But when it comes to religion and the catholic form of it in particular, I dont condem the followers as much as I condem the god, the one to whom you all worship as the very embodiement of love. Where was it as the children cried out to it while being raped, often in its own holy temple. Where was it as the witches burned, as the slaves were being bought and brought to america?<br />
If there were a god it would be the duty of every man woman and child to bring it down from its throne and split its head open.

Every institution in this world will have people involved who are immoral or do immoral things. It is not fair to any religion to judge it by its followers. The behavior you have seen is a reflection on human nature, not a reflection on religion. You must look at the religious doctrine itself and the people who faithfully follow it. By the way, the Catholic Church, far from seeing sex as "wicked," considers it sacred and therefore something to be treated prudently. Perhaps you have encountered misinformed/erring Catholics on that one, but that's official Church teaching.

"Being a priest - it's the oldest profession" That's a good one!