Xanikk999
History junkie
Tycoon101 said:
No its just as wrong as any theocracy.
Would you support an Atheistic Theocracy?
- Thread starter Tycoon101
- Start date
No its just as wrong as any theocracy.
pboily
fingerlickinmathematickin
What is the unintended pun?Trajan12 said:
Trajan12
Deity
Atheists are atheists because they wont commit to God. Atheists wont support an atheist theocracy because they wont commit to atheism. Not very funny but it did catch my eye.pboily said:
Xanikk999
History junkie
Trajan12 said:
Some athiests are so commited to athiesm that they are more fanatical then most christians.
I find this quite disturbing...
scipian
Czar
That's stupid and as bad or worse than a religious theocracy. To ban all religions would go against the US Constitution and make 80% of the world furious. I don't want any theocracy and anyone telling me what to believe.
greenpeace
Peacelord
scipian said:
can't...resist.. Your last sentence should read, "I don't want any theocracy and/or anyone telling me what to do," otherwise you would be o.k. with someone telling you what to do or being ruled under a theocracy
[/off topic]
Nah, religion is mostly harmless. There's scientology of course, and crusades, and jihadists, but the rest of it is ok. I wouldn't mind going after people who kill for their religions, or kill other people because of their religions (i.e. Bush's crusade against the evil Muslims, or the jihadist crusade against the evil infidels, or the Scientologist policy of "fair game"). That's wrong when it's done for secular reasons, it's wrong when it's done for religious reasons, it's wrong any way you look at it, and those who do it should be stopped. Provided you're not killing people or anything, you should be allowed to believe whatever you want to believe.
I do think a good government would be likely to have only atheists in it, but I don't exclude the possibility that some theists could be equally good rulers, nor do I assume that all atheists would be good rulers. The idea of restricting a government to atheists only is silly, and unlikely to improve anything. However, I do think we should have much higher standards for who is allowed to make decisions on behalf of the country. At present, you could be a high school dropout who thinks the Earth is flat and babies are delivered by storks, just so long as you have enough money to support a massive propaganda campaign. When/if you do that, you get to pass laws about what is or is not to be included in school education. It doesn't make any sense. Even worse is that most laws aren't even read before they're passed. The system is broken.
I do think a good government would be likely to have only atheists in it, but I don't exclude the possibility that some theists could be equally good rulers, nor do I assume that all atheists would be good rulers. The idea of restricting a government to atheists only is silly, and unlikely to improve anything. However, I do think we should have much higher standards for who is allowed to make decisions on behalf of the country. At present, you could be a high school dropout who thinks the Earth is flat and babies are delivered by storks, just so long as you have enough money to support a massive propaganda campaign. When/if you do that, you get to pass laws about what is or is not to be included in school education. It doesn't make any sense. Even worse is that most laws aren't even read before they're passed. The system is broken.
Adamb0mb
Lawless
scipian said:
greenpeace said:
Your last sentence should read, "I don't want any theocracy and/or anyone telling me what to do," otherwise you would be o.k. with someone telling you what to do or being ruled under a theocracy
[/off topic]
I read it as "I don't want any theocracy" and "I don't want anyone telling me what to believe."
Which was obviously the author's intent.
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Basicly I interperate it as "I want Freedom of Religion as well as Freedom from Religion".Adamb0mb said:
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Just when I'm growing more and more convinced this forum is packed with loonies, someone posts a poll like this and proves me wrong. Thanks a lot! 
Seriously
edit: By the way, it seems that the atheists and non-atheists are quite evenly spread across the board (50% vs 45%). So we won't have any more of this: "Mostly atheist forum" argument again right?
Seriously
edit: By the way, it seems that the atheists and non-atheists are quite evenly spread across the board (50% vs 45%). So we won't have any more of this: "Mostly atheist forum" argument again right?
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Its still mostly an atheist forum since the religious is still in the minority around here (I go by the the population count). 44人　Atheists (Taking into account Perfection's joke voteZiggyS said:
) and 41人 Religious (Note: 人　is the Kanji for person. For the purpouse of this post, I am using it as a symbol for Population when the number is placed in front of it). Statisticly, there are still more Athiests than Religious.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
I said that: 50% vs 45%. (And it's 48 vs 43 *picks nit* (Perf's vote added to the atheist 49 vs 42) You forgot to include the yes-I-would's) But the difference is not that humoungus as some would like me to believe 
Sorry for the bracketmania.
I'd think that qualifies as: quite even
Sorry for the bracketmania.I'd think that qualifies as: quite even
greenpeace
Peacelord
I know he said "and," it should be and/orAdamb0mb said:
[/off topic-threadjacking]
Gogf
Indescribable
No. Government should not be affiliated in religion - or lack thereof - any in way, shape, or form.
Trajan12
Deity
But who gets the radioactive monkey voteZiggyS said:I said that: 50% vs 45%. (And it's 48 vs 43 *picks nit* (Perf's vote added to the atheist 49 vs 42) You forgot to include the yes-I-would's) But the difference is not that humoungus as some would like me to believe
I'd think that qualifies as: quite even
Neonanocyborgasm
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,695
Tycoon101 said:
There's no such thing as an atheist theocracy because atheism isn't a religion.
Hell, of course not!
Yes yes, we all get it, but I think we can easily imagine the atheistic equivalent of a theocracy. "Theocracy" wouldn't be the best word to use, but it is a good analogy. I at least am capable of imagining a state where atheism is enforced the way some religions are enforced in some theocracies.
Similar threads
