How would you set about "proving" that Duke Ellington (or Chuck Berry) is good? You believe he is, and so do lots of other people, but that's a matter of "faith"...

Kevin, that is not a matter of 'faith' it is a matter of taste, which is what religion or any other system people will group themselve into, is. People follow what appeals to them on some level for whatever reason.

I wish there were better words than "atheist" or "agnostic", since both of these carry lots of connotations that don't apply to me.

John, that is the nature of all labels that lump people together. Some will view with disdain the Catholic, others, the Jew, another the diasbled child, the black youth or the unmarried mother. No getting around it as long as any group or person excludes another group or person.

the great athiest non god came down and told you exactly what life was all about and how it all worked and now it is your mission to preach to the rest of us or enlighten the rest of us on the folly of our faith ...

Dan, not all unbelievers are trying to push their nonbelief down the believer's throat. As I stated before, Dawkins' television style I find repugnant. I purposely do not call myself an atheist or agnostic because; 1) I don't like labels, 2) I won't be defined by a group "The mob is the untruth." because it impedes my ability to think for myself and displaces my personal responsibility for word and deed committed within and without the group. But I would never tell anyone else they should or should not believe this or that. What I would do is let a person know when a specific word or deed, harms or excludes another human being.

What I find interesting is that so many non-believers here feel it's their duty to start threads and get in the face of those people who belive in a higher power of some sort - just to tell them how wrong they are. IF people of faith were to take ACTIONS against you for your beliefs that would be wrong. But it seems to me that many of the athiests here find THOUGHTS objectionable. And I've been told that before - that my thoughts are offensive to another Mudcatter even though we've never met - and I've taken no actions against them. It appears that some of the athiests here would love to become the thought police.

It's the difference of thoughts vs actions.

Can you see the difference?

Wesley, the original post was not a slap in the face to believers. It was mearly a statement of personal opinion and one that I interpreted as a developing opinion, based upon his phrasing. By your own description, it was his THOUGHT and not an ACTION. But on an electronic forum where ACTION is not possible THOUGHT will stand as ACTION if the reader wishes to view it as such, as you have demonstrated in the diatribe cited above.


BillD and JohnP - I agree there is a worrying discrimination in politics and business towards ahteist and agnostic as there is to some religions, which is why many people do not aswer the reigious affiliation part of job applications. Again labels and sorting individuals into groups is what is destructive and unfair.

Let's make this clear... the thread title is the name of the book written by Dawkins, the presenter of television "documentary" viewed by the OP.   It was not made up by the OP in order to inflame sensibilities of anyone on this forum.   That was just an accident (happy to some and unhappy to others).



This forum could and should be the perfect tool for understanding and accepting each other whatever we believe or don't. Instead it devolves like so many others into division.

love to all from tamara, the naive.