Should atheism be recognised?

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by S.A.M., Mar 9, 2009.

?

Should atheism be recognised?

  1. Yes, I want to be recognised for the stuff I don't believe in

    4 vote(s)
    44.4%
  2. No, its stupid to have a category for NOT believing in something

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Got better things to think about

    5 vote(s)
    55.6%
  4. My opinion, which is better than yours, is given in a post below

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    That is NOT the definition of secular.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Like I said - flagrant.
    You're young yet, there's time.

    Meanwhile, there's the issue of whether theists can recognize atheists, and what they would have to do to accomplish that apparently difficult feat.

    IIRC somebody a few weeks ago was going to much trouble to establish that the countries like India and Lebanon were the truly secular ones, and the Western countries were not truly secular because they did not allow religions sufficient public expression.

    There's also the complication that the countries we are now calling secular have the capability to invade the so-called non-secular, and the countries we are now calling non-secular can't invade back. This differential capability tends to bias the statistics.

    And finally, we do have numerous invasions by non-secular countries of those countries vulnerable to them. Israel, for example, invaded Lebanon - are we agreed that Lebanon is more secular than Israel? - and Pakistan has invaded India and Bangladesh, various non-secular African peoples have done much invading, and so forth. Now the death toll is lower, in most of these cases (maybe not the African ones), but that seems to come down to capability again.
    Except for the religious ones, of course.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    wha?? That's not even close to what secular means. :bugeye:
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I don't know how westerners define it. Indians define secular as worldly, not associated with religion or outside or separate from religion. Hence we have religious matters which are those that concern different religious groups and secular matters, which are common to all and separate from religious matters.

    Atheists have no religion so they fall outside religious matters anyway.
     
  8. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Don't worry Orly, Sam will continue to do the "dance" until you get tired or bored or both trying to get her to stand still for a moment.

    You're doing a good job of exposing her bullshit, though. :thumbsup:
     
  9. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    westerners?? I think just about everyone who knows the word defines it as the dictionary does. OK, so what secular and non-secular countries were you talking about in the invasion scenario?
     
  10. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    sec⋅u⋅lar
    –adjective
    1. of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests.
    2. not pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to sacred ): secular music.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secular?qsrc=2888
     
  11. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    I think you're stretching the definition a bit, but I suppose you could apply it to most western nations.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secular?qsrc=2888
     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Yup, thats correct.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    So how are atheists not secular ?
     
  14. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    and the secular and non-secular countries you were talking about are....
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Its not my definition. India is a multireligious country and we have a secular culture and social systems. ie we don't interfere in religious matters and have civil as well as religious laws to accomodate as required.
     
  16. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Then, you are wrong.
     
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Atheists are generally irrelevant as a consideration in secular societies. They just fall along the lines of the common civil regulations. There is no need to define the worldly for them, since they have no religious considerations. e.g. we have a Hindu marriage Act for Hindus and a Special Marriage Act for others. But all religious marriages are equally valid and follow religious laws. Atheists would fall in anywhere they wanted to.
     
  18. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    That is the same definition I referred to.. :shrug:
     
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Except for the religious ones, of course.

    And the ones being abused by religious matters.

    But the entire secular/non-secular business has become fairly confused over the past few months.
     
  20. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Hmm I don't think so:

     
  21. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Well as an Indian, possibly I see no connection between atheism and religion. However, also as an Indian, you're welcome to your notions.

    I like how you skip the first definition and go to the second one.

    What difference does it make to an atheist how he/she gets married?
     
  22. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Ignorance is a temporary state - if you choose.
    Depends on their religion, if any. The Navajo and Buddhist and Taoist atheists tend to have a ritual in mind.
     
  23. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828

    Our definition of "secular" must be corrupt then. A nation that tolerates religion is not the same as one that incorporates religious doctrine into its laws. There seems to be a fine line.
     

Share This Page