Hello! I happen to love a good debate, so I'll play along!
THUNK said:
I love being an athiest. I feel free. Im my own Man. I have chosen to lead a good and moral life without input from religious clubs and books. THIS HAS COME FROM INSIDE OF ME ALONE - great!
Glad you found what works for you. I love being a spiritual person. I feel free as well, and each person is necessarily their own person through free will, genetics aside. Even the most devout made the free choices to put themselves in that position.
I'm glad you've found a morality without religion. However, in cross-cultural comparison it has been religion throughout human existence that has enticed people into right action and defined for each society what right action is. It is only very recently that we have law and government with the force to enforce the law. Although I am not religious (as in agreement with only one social entity with doctrine), I do recognize the tremendous value of religion for society. Even my (mostly) atheist anthropologist collegues recognize that religion has value and function in society, though they do not personally feel the need for it. So I would be careful about throwing out religion- quite frankly, it keeps a lot of people in line, and is the cheapest most efficient way to do so, so apart from the metaphysical issues, it's the best thing we humans have to get folks to act morally.
As for morality coming from within, that makes perfect sense to me. My own beliefs are that right action is written on one's soul, if one only takes the time to listen and ponder, and then takes the effort and commitment to act. That isn't evidence against God/the Divine to me; it is in perfect accord with my own experience of It.
I can stand up to life on my own without the walking stick of religion.
Quite frankly, this just smacks of a superior attitude, which just doesn't much help anybody. Each person in this world is born with a unique set of needs and gifts (surely you'd agree with that, at least from a genetic perspective), and we shouldn't make judgments on others' needs or gifts from our outsider's perspective, nor should we judge entire groups of people simply because they do not fit in our worldview. This is reminiscent of the very prejudiced statements Westerners make about those "superstitious" natives all over the world- "Oh,
we can stand up to life without all this mumbo-jumbo magic nonsense." "
We're so much smarter, better educated, and more advanced than those shamans." Never mind that the shamans often have enough herbal knowledge to make a doctor's head spin.
I have lots of atheist friends and collegues, and they are some of the most ethical people I know. It never offends me that other people don't believe as I do. It does offend me when people make insinuations that they are somehow superior in intellect or strength simply because their perspective of the world doesn't include what for me has been very real experiences. It also is offensive to adopt this sort of "Atheism is the pinacle of intelligent existence" attitude, when there are thousands of geniuses that believe in God, as well as religious practioners all over the world with great wisdom that speaks to the human experience, whether you are atheist or not.
Religion is not necessarily a crutch. It is a social attempt to express an experience of a Big Something out there beyond expression, to put together moral codes that help people in each society make choices that will create more unity within the group, and to help people bond to one another. Religion is useful, and it isn't just for weaklings and crack-pots.
I often feel 'spiritual' and in awe of the world around me, this world, not one Im trying to get to. This one is good enough.
And you'd be in good company with a lot of neo-Pagans and Buddhists, both of whom are religious (involved in an organized tradition of approaching spirituality and morality) but not theistic.
You are not properly setting apart theism and religion. They are two different concepts and there are atheistic religions, as well as theists without religion.
Best of all, I dont have to belong to a conformist gang, Im a free spirit.
Funny, I'm not conformist either. In not being conformist, part of that is acknowledging my own mystical experiences, and not conforming to the atheism that is the dominant perspective in my discipline. Just because a person is a theist, doesn't mean they are being conformist. They might be responding to their own experience rather than trying to conform to others'.
I notice people form certain religious & cultural groups use thier religion like a shield. They declare to the world that they follow strict religous lifestyle and act in a highly moral way, but this is far from reality.
Well, first I would say that reality is filtered through one's cultural lense as it were. So your reality is not entirely their reality. Yes, you share certain bits of reality, but the way you interpret these things is very different. An excellent example is that many indigenous groups experience the natural world as being animated with nature spirits. Animals, trees, places have spirits with sentience and power. This is not a "belief," it is how they actually perceive reality. Now, there are two possibilities, and neither are scientific because neither can be disproven. One is that you are correct- there are no spirits animating nature. Trees are just bits of organic matter strung together with a bunch of processes that make them alive for the time being. They don't talk, and they certainly don't have magical powers. But... you still can't prove this conclusion. It is based on your perspective, on your subjective experience. The second possibility is that they are correct- spirits animate all of nature. Trees are organic matter, but are also inhabited by a spirit that can talk to someone, impart wisdom.
You see, neither possibility is more scientific than the other, because we can neither prove nor disprove the existence of animating spirits, just as we cannot prove nor disprove the existence of God, the Tao, the Divine, etc. Both are
perspectives based on
subjective experience. And since we cannot divorce reality from our perception of it, the filtering process of our brain, personality, cultural baggage... we are experiencing different realities in some ways, and though we share some concrete referents, we come to some very different conclusions.
Doesnt sit well with thier religuos declarations - but they can always seek forgiveness - how convienient.
Now, a schism between belief and action is something entirely different, and something with which the dedicated in any faith disagree. I think it is generally due to a lack of faith if a person's life is substantially different from their beliefs and moral codes. We all slip up now and then, with or without God watching in our minds. I'm sure, for example, you do not always act in accordance with what you think is the best course of action. Humans are emotional creatures, after all, and certainly fallible. But a consistent dischord between belief and action is problematic and points (generally) to someone not really holding those beliefs. I am forgetting the person, but some social thinker once said- "If these people really believed the horrors of hell or the paradise of heaven was coming after death, and that God was watching, they wouldn't act this way!" Indeed.
I cant say which religious groups as I understand people on this forum are very sensitive and not able to exist with frank and honest debate, even though they preach 'fogiveness'??
Come now, surely your rational mind has recognized that you can't lump everyone under one conceptual umbrella as having the same emotional reactions, thoughts, and capacity for debate. Right? If you scan the oh-so-discretely described "forum" you mention, you'll find we don't all agree on lots and lots of issues, which typically results in a polite discussion of each person's beliefs, points of agreement and disagreement, and the reasons for each. And though I've sometimes faced judgment by
some of the people in the category to which you are alluding, I would never compromise my own intellectual and moral integrity by reducing my own perceptions to stereotypes and prejudicial thinking. (Gentle chiding...
)
