Friday, July 13, 2012

Behaving badly at the annual general council of atheist churches atheists?

The article alleges that women are abandoning the atheist annual conference due to sexual harassment.  To be honest, I don't have any first hand evidence of such behavior nor do I believe everything in the news.  My interests have been more in the origin of the atheist's belief that they are morally superior to theists.  The result of this search has turned up the Epicureans (~300BC) with their explanation about how vile the theists were, thus proving the moral superiority of their scientific atheism:

"I fear perhaps thou deemest that we fare 
An impious road to realms of thought profane; 
But 'tis that same religion oftener far 
Hath bred the foul impieties of men: 
As once at Aulis, the elected chiefs, 
Foremost of heroes, Danaan counsellors, 
Defiled Diana's altar, virgin queen, 
With Agamemnon's daughter, foully slain. 
She felt the chaplet round her maiden locks 
And fillets, fluttering down on either cheek, 
And at the altar marked her grieving sire, 
The priests beside him who concealed the knife, 
And all the folk in tears at sight of her. 
With a dumb terror and a sinking knee 
She dropped; nor might avail her now that first 
'Twas she who gave the king a father's name. 
They raised her up, they bore the trembling girl 
On to the altar- hither led not now 
With solemn rites and hymeneal choir, 
But sinless woman, sinfully foredone, 
A parent felled her on her bridal day, 
Making his child a sacrificial beast 
To give the ships auspicious winds for Troy: 
Such are the crimes to which Religion leads." - Lucretius (99-55BC), On The Nature Of Things.

Certainly for the king to sacrifice his daughter to propitiate the gods is a bit rude, although today's atheist male probably doesn't know who his daughter is - assuming she didn't get aborted.  The shouting match about who is more vile will certainly continue until God puts an end to it.


Delirious said...

I can ignore the athiests, but it's hard to ignore when your own government is trying to destroy religion.

Looney said...

Isn't our government formally atheist?

Delirious said...

Well, that is what the left would like to believe anyway.

Vid said...

I think the problem is that a lot of people- theists and atheists alike- believe that morals are based on religion. So theists will say that they're more moral because their religion mandates more morals, and atheists will say they're more moral because they don't need a religion to give them morals.

But I think that it's the other way around. Morals are innate to the person, and they choose a religion based on these morals. In any case I can't see how having a different belief about God could influence what you innately feel is right or wrong.

And the government isn't really formally atheist; it's secular in a way that makes no judgement about religion one way or another (at its basis anyway).

Looney said...

Vid, I agree with you that morals are mostly innate. Then we have to note that survival of the fittest invariably favors those who are amoral ...

Still, I think that training in morals is possible. As with dogs, so with people.

As for our government, it is currently pushing very hard to engineer Islamic theocracies across the middle east. Here in California the government has funded Islamic charter schools and would continue if they could get away with it. Thus, I think the picture is rather complex.