Jump to content

  

86 members have voted

  1. 1. Which would you identify yourself as?

    • Atheist
      10
    • Agnostic
      32
    • Other
      44


Recommended Posts

There are definitely those who evangalize atheism right here on this board.

:shifty

 

I like these:

I know you've got a god-shaped hole

You're bleeding out your heart full of soul

There's a God-shaped hole

Bleeding love up above

And in my heart full of soul

I just can't seem to get enough

 

 

I think I have a booze-shaped hole.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

One of these things that I've always respected about people committed to their faith is that even though they're tested day to day, they still have their faith.
I've always been a bit jealous of this. It seems that it would be such a load off of my back if I could wake up each day believing, "God will take care of me. I'm a good Christian and I've covered my ass by following all of the rules. There is a paradise waiting for me in the great beyond." (Or whatever faith system drives a person, not necessarily Christianity) I can't do that, have that kind of faith, not a bit.

 

I figure there's a good chance that I've only got this one life to live and I'm not going to let anyone tell me how to live it in order to get some great prize when I've finished my run on this planet. (:pirate Arrrrgh! Ain't nobody gonna tell me what to do! :yay ) I have no idea what is waiting for me in the great beyond. That doesn't scare me or anything. I've got my moral compass. I follow it. I just can't get behind any religion that claims to know what this crazy world is really all about. I don't know what it's all about and highly doubt I ever will. The mystery is great. I dig it.

 

My envy of those who have strong faith has lessened over the years thanks to things like the revelation that Mother Teresa had great doubts about her faith. That's really something.

 

Sooooooo, I clicked agnostic. For me, that means that I don't know either way, God or no God or great vibrating string of energy or not or whatever. I don't know. I do think of myself as a "seeker" though. I haven't closed the door to the possibility of the existence of some really fantastic, magical thing going on here. I just haven't witnessed or seen enough evidence to support it myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

llyn, you've got my thoughts, but you wrote them better!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that Theresa had doubts about her faith makes her all the more human, and more respectable.

 

Also, this is kind of what lynn touched on there, a little bit, I think. One of the more interesting bits I've seen on religion from a philosophical standpoint:

 

Pascal's Wager

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to reserve my thoughts on Christopher Hitchens for the Douchebag thread.

 

Before you do that, you might want to read this:

 

HitchensTeresa.jpg

 

I just don't see how you can view Mother Teresa with disgust...

 

Why, aside from her brand recognition, how familiar are you with her

Link to post
Share on other sites
I read the Ghandi only went on hunger strikes because he was stubborn.

 

Thank god (or whomever/noone) that where will always be those on the sidelines to harshly and callously judge the efforts of those humans who take action, ready to put any effort on a scale, with a thumb applying appropriate pressure.

 

That

Link to post
Share on other sites
That’s one way to say it, another way would be, thank god for people who are willing to look critically (and, in case you are unaware, Hitchens was contacted by the Vatican to give evidence against MT’s beatification) and unflinchingly at the lives of canonized historical figures – and thank god they are willing to report back well and truly.

Yes, thanks for the critics. Those that go to great lengths to do nothing but provide static and minutae. Without them, nothing would happen at a more respectable pace.

 

I guess Hitchens actually doing concrete to address the plight of the poor was not as quality a gig as being able to throw rocks at MT (who apparently hasn't been canonized but acronymized).

 

Delmar: Oh son, for that you sold your everlasting soul?

Tommy: Well, I wasn't usin' it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, thanks for the critics. Those that go to great lengths to do nothing but provide static and minutae. Without them, nothing would happen at a more respectable pace.

 

I guess Hitchens actually doing concrete to address the plight of the poor was not as quality a gig as being able to throw rocks at MT (who apparently hasn't been canonized but acronymized).

 

Another way to say it would be, a balanced, honest portrait based on historical fact, rather than hearsay and uncritical reception.

 

Hitchens is a writer and a journalist, unlike MT, saint is not listed on his resume

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you arguing with her being sainted if you don't believe in it?

 

She did good work in her life, and the majority of her work had a positive outcome. You can point out the faults in anyone, but that doesn't write off all of the good they did.

 

If she wasn't a christian hero, you wouldn't give a shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why are you arguing with her being sainted if you don't believe in it?

 

She did good work in her life, and the majority of her work had a positive outcome. You can point out the faults in anyone, but that doesn't write off all of the good they did.

 

And how did you come to this conclusion? Have you gone to the lengths that Hitchens did in researching his book, up to an including interviewing MT herself, or is your perception of her and her overwhelmingly positive work based on, what

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, they give a lot of frauds the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

I just don't understand why you even care? What's she getting a free pass to anyways? If it's becoming a saint, why do you care, you don't believe in Catholicism or saints, so what's the big deal?

 

She did a lot of good for a lot of people. She helped people die with dignity who otherwise would have been literally left to die in the gutter. Whether or not she hurt the cause to "empower women" is besides the point. It was a slum of the highest degree and no matter how many women were empowered, it wouldn't have made one bit of difference given the place they were in. It's not like she was in in the US dealing with the poor, she was in the slums of Calcutta.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...