[Serious]Why are you not a believer of the existence of God

[FunkyDexter]

OK, I've got a bit more time now. Damn this whole employment lark getting in the way.

First of all, I never said a 'better' perspective, I said broader and that's an important distinction in this case. You can only define 'better' in the context of a known truth and the whole point of this debate is that the truth isn't known - or at least we disagree on it which means our views of what is 'better' will differ.

I'll still stand by broader, though, because it is absolutely part of human nature to discount arguments that conflict with our beliefs. We seek out media that reinforce our beliefs. We surround ourselves with people whose beliefs roughly correspond to our own. We are, of course, able to open our minds to the other argument but it is something that we must conciously do and, whether we like it or not, the tendancy is not to. That doesn't mean we can't give the opposping view credence, or that we won't, but it does mean that we're considerably less likely to. In that context I would argue that anyone who hasn't made their mind about any argument has a broader perspective in that argument. The very act of "making up one's mind" about anything must, by definition, involve closing that mind to some extent.

Zaza, I agree with a lot of you're response but I'd argue a couple of points.
1. I don't believe any war has truly been fought or persecution pursued because of religion. Religion's name has been invoked as a rallying call, certainly, but there are always underlying socio political causes. The troubles in Ireland were rooted in foreign occupation and more recently were driven by a lack of political representation for the South in government. The march that turned into Bloody Sunday was a protest against the fact that poverty in the South had reached the point where people were starving, not that people were Catholic or Protestant. The situation between Isreal and Palestine and all it's spin offs are again rooted in Foreign Occupation and, again, the poverty and starvation in the Palestinian territories. The Palestinians don't bomb the Jews because they're Jewish, they bomb them because they see them as the cause of their misery and want to fight back. Equally the Jews don't send tanks into Palestine or Lebanon because these are Arab countries, they do so because they think it will help protect themselves against terrorist attacks. When Ferdinand and Isabella called for the Spanish Inquisition against the Jews it wasn't because they were Jewish, it was because the Jews had all the money and Ferdinand and Isabella wanted it. Yes, religion is used as a rallying call but so is nation, skin colour or what football team one supports. Getting rid of religion wouldn't reduce the number of wars that are fought one jot, it would simply change the rhetoric.

Which works both ways...

Absolutely, but two wrongs don't make a right. Argue against how selective interpretation of a religious text can be used to justify an evil act, certainly. But don't then selectively quote religious texts in an attempt to demonstrate that the religion is, itself, evil.

racial, national and gender boundaries

Why are any of these boundaries any more valid than religious ones. Wherever there is a boundary there will be division, regardless of the nature of the boudary.

they are prepared to suspend logic or a requirement for evidence

Nothing to do with religion I'm afraid. That's just human nature. Have you seen reality TV?!

susceptible to manipulation by skillful argument

pfft, doesn't even need to be skillful, just passionate. And it certainly doesn't need to be religious.

promotes conversion of the non-believers as a requirement

the only difference between religions and any other grouping is that in religion this is explicit. It's Human Nature that, not only do we group with people who are like us, but we want everyone else to be like us too. That's why we debate. That's why we argue. It's because we want to convince the others that our's is the right way to be.

In truth I think we're saying almost exactly the same thing: that human beings form arbitrary groups and then rail against each other. The only difference is that I don't see why a religious grouping is any different to any other. You wouldn't argue with someone for being German... but identifying with that group caused alot more problems in the last century than religion did.

NSA, I'll answer a few of your points too:-

Yep, the title of the thread asks why people are not believers so unsurprisingly there are a lot of people on the thread who are stating just that

That's why I made a point of saying I was speaking generally. Of course, I did then go on to challenge people to look back through this thread which is a bit clumsy but, instead, go back and look through other threads there have been about religion in this forum. You'll find the same balance of responses no matter how the original question is phrased.

Are you being serious ?

Yes, absolutely. I may not get atheists knocking on my door asking if I've heard the good news (although at 37 that's still only actually happened once with a theist) but I do get atheists taking out banners on buses and creating works of theater which are undoubtedly designed specifically to offend, for example. I would also point out they've increasingly begun publishing their own 'religious texts'. One thing I want to stress here is that I'm talking about proselytising atheists - not the great mass who just just go around quietly not believing in God. But then I don't think you're really objecting to theists who don't proselytise either are you? In truth I think the vast majority on both sides of the debate are quite happy to keep themselves to themselves and most of the people I know who are religious haven't felt the need to mentioned it for quite a long time after they've known me - they didn't think it was any of my business.

However, when an atheist does proselytise they do tend to be extremeley aggressive and insulting about the their theist couterparts. In this thread you yourself (and I think your arguments been very measured, well put together and innoffensive on the whole and I really wish you'd given me some better examples to quote) have compared God to Father Christmas and called Christians deluded. That sort of language always seems to creep in when atheists argue against theists. I rarely, if ever, see it from theists in return.

I have no desire to convert anyone to atheism

Possibly not, but viewed from the outside that is how it appears I'm afraid.

I don't try and force my atheism on anyone else

that, on the other hand, I fully accept. You see to be trying to convince rather than to force. But at that point I go back to what I was saying right at the beginning of this thread: these discussions are never about a desire to achieve understanding of the other sides point of view. They're always about trying to get the other guy to accept your own point of view. I don't really believe that when Dee-U started this thread he truly thought there was a chance that your arguments would convince him to abandon his religion, he just wanted a platform to put his own opinion across. It's what we do, we can't help it. It's hard-wired in and I am, of course, doing it right now. <shrug>

isn't it a pity that many of there followers through out history have taught, rape slaughter and death.

Yes! but the fact that something is abused does not necessarily invaidate the thing. People have done alot of good in the name of religion too. A huge number of our charities have their roots in religion. The very concept of a welfare state in the UK traces back to Victorian Christian values. To be honest, I don't believe this good was done because people were Christian, they were done because they were humane and, just as rape and slaughter are part of human nature, so are charity and compassion. We do what we do because we are what we are. We then go on to justify in whatever manner makes us feel best about ourselves.

Show me a war in the world today and you can bet that religion splits the two sides

I'll do that when you can show me a war where the underlying cause is not either greed or desparation.

5Ms? I had wanted to respond to your points too but I've been writing this for nearly an hour now (I really need a life) and I've run out of steam. Your making some good points but could I direct you to the quote function. Without it your posts can be really hard to follow.

Apologies to all for the huge post but I saw a soap box and jumped on it.