Happy Atheist Forum

I'm not surprised.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... secularism (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/12/pope-benedict-atheism-secularism)

What about Stalin and Mao Xedong?

Interesting article.  

Is this true?

QuoteIn many US courtrooms, judges restrict or deny child custody rights to atheist parents. If they want children to grow up to be law-abiding citizens, and not end up back in court as juvenile delinquents, they should stand that policy on its head.

Quote from: "Tank"Is this true?

QuoteIn many US courtrooms, judges restrict or deny child custody rights to atheist parents. If they want children to grow up to be law-abiding citizens, and not end up back in court as juvenile delinquents, they should stand that policy on its head.

Depends on the judge.  The same applies to homosexuals and also in cases of adoption.  Sometimes atheists are harassed by the police as well.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"

Quote from: "Tank"Is this true?

QuoteIn many US courtrooms, judges restrict or deny child custody rights to atheist parents. If they want children to grow up to be law-abiding citizens, and not end up back in court as juvenile delinquents, they should stand that policy on its head.

Depends on the judge.  The same applies to homosexuals and also in cases of adoption.  Sometimes atheists are harassed by the police as well.

Also depends on the area.  Hence why we don't say anything about our lack of faith around here.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"

Quote from: "Tank"Is this true?

QuoteIn many US courtrooms, judges restrict or deny child custody rights to atheist parents. If they want children to grow up to be law-abiding citizens, and not end up back in court as juvenile delinquents, they should stand that policy on its head.

Quote from: "KDbeads"Depends on the judge.  The same applies to homosexuals and also in cases of adoption.  Sometimes atheists are harassed by the police as well.

Also depends on the area.  Hence why we don't say anything about our lack of faith around here.

Yeah, it depends on the area.  In Mississippi being an atheist could be a problem.  Here in Missouri in the St. Louis area, it doesn't seem to be such a huge deal.

In central Kentucky it's a hit or miss.  Some of the more hardcore (read: foot washing) religious folk have a serious problem with the a-word, but generally don't mind "I'm not religious".  Interestingly enough, the younger crowd tends to not care about the a-word, but when you say "I'm not religious" will ask if I'm atheist or agnostic.  I haven't had any problems with the law here.  I don't see cops by my house if there hasn't been an auto accident, except for one time when a neighbor's kid got lost and ended up my doorstep.  Regardless, I want to go back to Oregon.  Or maybe Washington.  Either way.

Quote from: "Sophus"What about Stalin and Mao Xedong?

Neither of those two were at all theistic (believing in a god) but both were by no means post-Enlightenment philosophical thinkers. I would even argue that they were religiously minded and made strong attempts to try to indoctrinate their constituents in highly religious, dogmatic, and propagandistic ways more similarly to the Vatican than say John Locke.

Strangling priests to get rid of theism is not a way to ensure a more civilized secular society. Both Stalinist Russian and Moaist China were very dogmatic and controlling of people's thoughts and had little to no regard to individual liberty. Vietnam has a much higher rate of atheists and people affiliated with no religion than the US, but I doubt many people would choose to live an average life-style in Vietnam than in the US. The atheists in the West tend to be much better read on the arguments for and against theism than anywhere else and consequently tend to be much better armed against cultish ideals and religious thought.

One thing about the stats on foreign aid, I do not think that we can assert that a more secular society will be more charitable than a religious one necessarily. The fact that Sweden does donate the most foreign based on GDP% does invalidate the idea that atheistic cultures are incapable of being charitable, but it does not mean they are more charitable. The Southern states of the US consistently donate a higher percentage of their incomes to charities than any other group of states in the US despite their larger religious populations by percentage. The correlation is not one-sided either way when it comes to charitableness as far as I can tell.

Quote from: "Intercourseman72"

Quote from: "Sophus"What about Stalin and Mao Xedong?

Neither of those two were at all theistic (believing in a god) but both were by no means post-Enlightenment philosophical thinkers. I would even argue that they were religiously minded and made strong attempts to try to indoctrinate their constituents in highly religious, dogmatic, and propagandistic ways more similarly to the Vatican than say John Locke.

Strangling priests to get rid of theism is not a way to ensure a more civilized secular society. Both Stalinist Russian and Moaist China were very dogmatic and controlling of people's thoughts and had little to no regard to individual liberty. Vietnam has a much higher rate of atheists and people affiliated with no religion than the US, but I doubt many people would choose to live an average life-style in Vietnam than in the US. The atheists in the West tend to be much better read on the arguments for and against theism than anywhere else and consequently tend to be much better armed against cultish ideals and religious thought.

One thing about the stats on foreign aid, I do not think that we can assert that a more secular society will be more charitable than a religious one necessarily. The fact that Sweden does donate the most foreign based on GDP% does invalidate the idea that atheistic cultures are incapable of being charitable, but it does not mean they are more charitable. The Southern states of the US consistently donate a higher percentage of their incomes to charities than any other group of states in the US despite their larger religious populations by percentage. The correlation is not one-sided either way when it comes to charitableness as far as I can tell.

Right, they were dogmatic. However, I was under the impression those two countries were predominantly atheist. Or at least China. Then again, the have lots of atheistic religions so I don't know if that would count.

Buddhists who don't deify Buddha are atheists but are not non-religious. Other major Chinese religions may also be atheistic as well. In religious surveys of populations they usually use the term "non-religious" or "unaffiliated". So I guess it would be more properly termed "no god and no religion" than just no god. Often, theistic people will fall into this category despite not being religious.

There are some good maps at the bottom of the page relating to religiosity in the world by nation.

Quote from: "Tank"Is this true?

QuoteIn many US courtrooms, judges restrict or deny child custody rights to atheist parents. If they want children to grow up to be law-abiding citizens, and not end up back in court as juvenile delinquents, they should stand that policy on its head.

I was not asked my religion when I defended my rights as a father in 2002, although I refused to "Swear", but rather "Affirmed", that I would tell "the truth, the whole ... "etc.

I'm sure it varies, the US is huge.

Quote from: "Tank"Is this true?

QuoteIn many US courtrooms, judges restrict or deny child custody rights to atheist parents. If they want children to grow up to be law-abiding citizens, and not end up back in court as juvenile delinquents, they should stand that policy on its head.

personally I think atheism would make a society better, simply because we don't lean on a god to solve all of our problems. We rely on our own knowledge and understandings and make the better choice with the options given. Instead of wating for god to tell us the answers.

I think that is poor judgment by those judges and is not appropriate for our country today.

They say that evolution, the big bang, and an old earth must science must be taught in schools, but people who believe that cannot have custody of their child because of what they believe?

Just another reason why the U.S. is a falling nation.  

Does anyone have some good keyword ideas for hunting up stats on custodial disputes involving atheists?  My searches are coming up pretty thin, and I'd like some hard numbers to inform my opinion.

Quote from: "KDbeads"Also depends on the area.  Hence why we don't say anything about our lack of faith around here.

 :shake:

I still can't get my head around that.

I don't think that they are like that.  People always believe in a Being which they worship. Christian centered societies believe God but often live in chaos. The reason is always on the people's attitude not on the things they believe in.

Quote from: "rcbako"I don't think there are? People always believe in a being which they worship. Christian centered societies believe God but often live in chaos. The reason is always on the people's attitude not on the things they believe in.

People's religious beliefs can shape their attitude and behaviour. I do get what you are saying. If someone is a bad person they will be bad no matter what they believe but a bad person can find easy justification for wrong doing via religion. Also those with mental issues aren't going get the help needed to function in society if their religion is dogmatic. Look at the deaths scientology has caused or what about a christian who says their child has demons in them? If you really believe what the bible says you have to take them seriously which could lead to tragedy and death indeed it has in the past. More to the point why look after your fellow man if you think there is someone in the sky looking out for us who will ultimately take care of it or that humans will get another life to straighten things out or enjoy bliss?

Quote from: "rcbako"I don't think there are? People always believe in a being which they worship. Christian centered societies believe God but often live in chaos. The reason is always on the people's attitude not on the things they believe in.

[Emphasis added]

This is a distinction without a difference.  Beliefs and attitudes make up a psychological feedback loop; each informs the other.