Atheism

I've been an atheist for 20+ years now (ex-catholic). Early in my atheism, followed the typical new-atheism route; reading Dawkins, watching tons of debates and interviews, participating in forums, joining atheist and rationalist groups. I went through an angry atheist phase, and then into a compassionate rationalist phase, seeking to understand religions and religious people, and to guide those who might be on the fence.

For many years I was optimistic about the future, thinking that rationality would spread and accelerate around the world. That newer generations would discard their religion and adopt progressive attitudes. More recently, and obviously due to current world events, I've lost hope in a brighter future. I suppose I set myself up for disappointment. I think you could make an argument that in the very long run (centuries), people are getting more educated, rational, and secular, but it seems clear that is not a guarantee in the short term. Looking at the rise of Christian nationalism in the US, misogynistic laws, anti-LGBT sentiments, the absolute loss of freedom for women in Afghanistan, etc; Even my close family are some mix of religious, conspiracy theorists, and anti-vaxxers. Evidently, humanity can easily regress decades worth of progress in an instant.

I'm sure we all have coping mechanisms, relationships and activities we enjoy, escapism to take our mind off things. If you put those aside, how do you deal with living in a religious, irrational world that will likely not improve in our lifetimes? Can we reason our way to a positive mindset? Is cope all we have?

Thanks in advance for your replies. I will read every single one of them.

From the American Humanist Association: contact your Congresscritter - tell them to oppose H.R. 9495, the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act.

Philosophy professor Hans-Georg Moeller, author of A Moral Fool: A Case for Amorality

For [Harris] the two things are the same: on the one hand objective moral truth (universal morality), and on the other hand scientific facts about what increases wellbeing and what doesn’t. […] I think the two things are very different from one another.

Just as religion is not something that depends on the existence of god, but is a specific social practice, a specific form of communication that relates to a certain unrealistic assumption; likewise morality is a specific discourse, a specific way of acting, that relates to and derives from making unrealistic assumptions about something that doesn’t exist.

Follow-up video: If Morality Exists Everything Is Permitted.

Found this pamphlet in my mailbox this morning. I pretty much agree with it and I think I'll keep it for the next time Jehovah's Witnesses decide to show up way too early in the morning.

Edit: I linked the digital mirror that was printed on the back of the pamphlet. Also, it's CC0 which I think is cool

The phrase "under God" was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance on June 14, 1954, 70 years ago today.

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/3662089

DarkMatter2525: I don't support Palestine. I support the innocent children who are being killed there.

http://archive.today/9TLDR

As Western bombs rain on Gaza’s starving civilians, the New Atheism turns 20. The philosophical genre, which argues for secularism over organized religion, was kick-started by Sam Harris. His 2004 book, The End of Faith, promoted neuroscience-based spirituality in place of irrational groupthink. The philosopher, Daniel Dennett, soon followed with Breaking the Spell (2006), as did the evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins, with his 2 million unit-selling, The God Delusion. The late essayist, Christopher Hitchens, completed the quartet, known as the Four Horsemen, publishing God Is Not Great (2007).

Inspired by the attacks of September 11th, the genre appeared on the scene shortly after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. It became immediately clear that the Four Horsemen were exploiting Enlightenment principles to justify the bombing of women and children in third world nations. Muslim terrorists are not aggrieved by Western foreign policy, the authors claim, but rather by their fanatical devotion to their faith. The decimation of Iraq was not motivated by elite US strategies to control oil markets, but because “god” told Bush to invade. The state does not exploit religious differences for cynical realpolitik; but rather, hateful mobs randomly attack each other because of their different belief systems.

As I document in my latest book, The New Atheism Hoax, the authors concocted a major fraud. In case after case, their own sources say the opposite of what they claim. This doesn’t happen a few times. It happens almost every time.

With the exception of Hitchens whom, in his final years, became a right-winger, the attention of liberals was diverted by the seductive, anti-religiosity of the New Atheists. Instead of analyzing the world through the only lens that matters—realpolitik—progressives were invited to divide the world into the simple dialectics promoted by George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden’s speechwriters: that of a “clash of civilizations,” to use a phrase popularized by Samuel P. Huntington.

A 1998 book by Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández featuring provocative, sexually-charged themes has resurfaced, likely adding further scrutiny to the already embattled prefect of the Vatican’s doctrine office.

Titled “Mystical Passion: Spirituality and Sensuality,” the 26-year-old work includes graphic descriptions of human sexual relations and discussion of what the Argentinian theologian describes as “mystical orgasm.”

The nearly 100-page-long book also depicts in detail an imaginary erotic encounter with Jesus Christ on the shores of Galilee, which Fernández said was based on a spiritual experience disclosed to him by a 16-year-old girl.

(podcast)

scientists led by archaeologist Prof Mark Collard of Simon Fraser University in Vancouver say the truth may be far more gruesome. “There is compelling evidence that these people may have had their fingers amputated deliberately in rituals intended to elicit help from supernatural entities,” said Collard.

Keri Ladouceur no longer calls herself an Evangelical Christian.

Like many younger members of this sprawling American religious tradition, she’s left what she says has become a movement mostly defined by aggressive white conservatism and Christian nationalism, the prerogatives of male privilege, and a near obsession with regulating human sexuality.

Crosspost from !atheism@feddit.de.

An overview of studies which investigate correlations between morality and religious vs. secular / atheist ideologies presented by Phil Zuckerman who is a professor of sociology and secular studies at the Claremont colleges in California, USA.

Summary: Atheists / secular people not only have morals but are even more moral than religious people.

Note: Of course moral is a matter of perspective. In this context we agree that compassion and empathy are our foundations of moral.