XPost: sci.psychology.psychotherapy, alt.consciousness, talk.origins   
   From: RaanOne@One.org   
      
   "Giant Sloth"  wrote in message   
   news:6b1053df.0409072346.1444912@posting.google.com...   
   >    
   >   
   > > > > > You're a fundemenatlist atheist, just as intellectually diseased   
   and   
   > > > > > morally perverted as your theistic counterparts.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > You do nto know me sir.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > > I think I have a unique vantage on this, being married to a   
   Catholic.  I   
   > > > > > don't agree with my wife's beliefs, and find her faith perplexing   
   at   
   > > > > > times, but you know what, that's her right, and neither I, you or   
   any   
   > > > > > other self-righteous bastard with a chip on their shoulder has any   
   right   
   > > > > > to take that away from her.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > Her affliction is to be pitied as is your own.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > > Learn a little respect, and quit blaming theism for the underlying   
   > > > > > problems of xenophic, hairless apes who use any goddamn excuse to   
   mop   
   > > > > > the floor with the other guy.  How can I stand up to someone like   
   Uncle   
   > > > > > Davey and say "I'm an atheist, and I'm not your enemy", when some   
   > > > > > evangelical like yourself is going around doing exactly what they   
   want.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > You fail to understand my view simply because you honestly cannot   
   conceive   
   > > > > of it supposing that everyone must believe something and yet instead   
   of   
   > > > > "looking into it" as I recommended you misconstrue it as an attack   
   on   
   > > > > theism.  There is little point in further discussion with someone   
   with a   
   > > > > chip on their shoulder the way you do.  Again I strongly suggest you   
   look   
   > > > > into the assertion that All belief is the underlying cause of human   
   > > > > suffering.  Note I said All belief and I mean belief of any kind.   
   Try it   
   > > > > again or don't expect any response.   
   > > >   
   > > >   
   > > > I don't have a chip on my shoulder but what you say makes little sense   
   > > > to me.  When you say all belief is the underlying cause of human   
   > > > suffering, that in itself is a belief.  Perhaps you are suffering   
   > > > because of that belief.  I looked on the website for the Council for   
   > > > Secular Humanism and found the following:   
   > >   
   > > No it is not a belief but an assertion and an observation which if you   
   > > actually bothered to look into it and consider it seriously whoulc   
   reveal   
   > > itself to you as a simple basic operational description of the actual   
   case.   
   > >   
   > >   
   > > > ****   
   > > > Secular humanists don't believe the one, final, absolute truth has   
   > > > been revealed to them. On the contrary, we believe that all beliefs   
   > > > are fallible and provisional, and that diversity and dialogue are   
   > > > essential to the process of learning and developing. Thus we value   
   > > > tolerance, pluralism, and open-mindedness as positive and beneficial   
   > > > qualities in society. Humanists are staunch supporters of freedom of   
   > > > religion, belief, and conscience, as laid out in both the U.S.   
   > > > Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These   
   > > > rights protect the freedom of religious belief equally with the   
   > > > freedom of nonreligious belief, the freedom of religion equally with   
   > > > the freedom from religion.   
   > > >   
   > > > Secular humanists would actually oppose advocacy of their worldview by   
   > > > schools or the government because that would violate the neutrality of   
   > > > a secular society, and the rights of religious believers. Secular   
   > > > humanists believe that a healthy society supports a variety of   
   > > > worldviews, just as it supports a variety of political parties. We   
   > > > also believe that religious and philosophical views should be every   
   > > > bit as open to debate and discussion as political beliefs.   
   > > > *****   
   > > >   
   > > > Sounds like secular humanists themselves have beliefs, including the   
   > > > belief that a healthy society has a variety of worldviews (set of   
   > > > beliefs).  Do you disagree?   
   > >   
   > > I disagree with the terminology being used.  Belief is not the best word   
   to   
   > > identify the philosophical position which denies the advocacy of   
   beliefs.   
   > > There is a logical fallacy which hinges on just such a confusion of   
   meaning   
   > > when the same word is used to describe different things but is then   
   taken to   
   > > mean the same thing by the antagonist.  Clearly if there is a belief in   
   no   
   > > beliefs this is a contradiction however if the former term belief is   
   > > understood as meaning something similar to but other then belief as used   
   in   
   > > the second term, the contradiction is dissolved and your argument   
   rendered   
   > > impotent.  It is for this very reason that I resist the use of the term   
   at   
   > > all.  Worldview may be the best term to use since one may operate under   
   a   
   > > given worldview without holding it to be the truth without conclusive   
   > > evidence, which is what a belief is.  A worldview need not be a belief   
   per   
   > > se though many might use the word belief in a casual way.  For example,   
   is   
   > > an opinion always a belief?  No but a belief is always an opinion.  And   
   is a   
   > > worldview not an opinion?  Yes it is and so while it may be a belief it   
   is   
   > > not necessarily so.  Examine the meaning of what you are arguing against   
   and   
   > > examine the motives for your argument.  If I make an assertion I expect   
   it   
   > > to be examined and argue reasonably and not simply dismissed as a belief   
   > > since to invite such examination with an open mind certainly means that   
   it   
   > > is not a belief.  Is any of this making sense to you now?   
   >   
   > Well, moving beyond semantic quibbling over the meaning of belief, I   
   > notice that the picture of secular humanism I get from the quote above   
   > is quite different from what I get reading your notes.  The website   
   > quote refers to a society that supports a variety of worldviews as   
   > being healthy. It sounds like such a society would support religious   
   > as well as non-religious worldviews.  Yet you pity a person because   
   > they have a Catholic worldview.  Why would a "healthy" society support   
   > "afflictions"?  Also the website quote sounds reasonable and open   
   > minded when it says that "all beliefs are fallible and provisional".   
   > When you say that you "pity" a person because of their Catholic   
   > worldview, it sounds like you "believe the one, final, absolute truth   
   > has been revealed" to you; you are so sure of your worldview that you   
   > can pity others from the standpoint of your great wisdom.  This is   
   > arrogance.  I think if you want your secular humanism to sound   
   > attractive to others, you will take up the worldview as expressed by   
   > the quote, not just because your arrogance is a form of self-delusion,   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)