Home › Forums › Political Corner › Thoughts On Religion and Atheism+
This topic contains 73 replies, has 19 voices, and was last updated by 
IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) 4 years ago.
- AuthorPosts
I can’t understand why someone not under the influence of superstitious religious dogma based on supernatural belief in a soul would consider an early fetus a person. Maybe someone opposed to birth control might take this philosophically bankrupt position. A potential person at best, but not a person. Why is the concept of a person as a sentient being so hard to differentiate from a bunch of brainless cells?
Life begins at conception, and the unborn child is a human being.
But the Bible isn’t alone in declaring this truth. Science also declares that an unborn child is just as much an independent human being as you. The original human cell consists of 46 chromosomes, 23 from each parent. At no point during pregnancy does the mother contribute any new cells to the child. The original cell divides itself and multiplies to provide development and growth for the child. Scientifically speaking, the child is just as independent at six months before birth as he will be six months after birth. Yes, the mother does provide nourishment to the unborn child, but she also provides nourishment to the newborn child!
At two weeks pregnancy, the “fetus” can move alone. By four weeks the child has limbs, muscle tissue, a heart and heartbeat. Ears, eyes, and small hands are visible by the fifth week. The child responds to touch sensations by the sixth or seventh week. At eight weeks, the baby sometimes tries to take a breath when removed from the mother. At twelve weeks, the child will often struggle for life two or three hours when removed from the mother.
( source: http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/abortion.html )
Or: those fetuses are enemy combatants in the war on overpopulation. We can kill em if we call em that probably,
Words People. Words. First there was actually the thought.
Or…
Aborted fetus cells used in beauty creams – Washington Times
Nov 3, 2009 … A San Francisco cosmetics company has ignited an outcry among … for a Dead Baby,” in which author Olga Fairfax wrote that fetal tissue could …
101 USES FOR A DEAD (or live) BABY by Olga Fairfax, Ph.D . When …
101 USES FOR A DEAD (or live) BABY by Olga Fairfax, Ph.D . When I saw the first ad on TV advertising collagen-enriched cosmetics I was speechless. We’ll be …Aborted Human Fetal Cells in Your Food, Vaccines & Cosmetics …
Dec 22, 2011 … Aborted Human Fetal Cells in Your Food, Vaccines & Cosmetics. Posted on …. Now I come to find out that I have been eating dead babies!Comprehensive List Of Companies That Use Aborted Fetal Cells As …
Jul 7, 2013 … HEK cell Products; http://www.cogforlife.org/fetalproductsall.pdf …. CANDY, ETC YOU ARE EATING DEAD BABIES BECASUE THEY ARE MAIN …Avoid Any Products Containing Aborted Fetal Cells — Health …
Mar 9, 2012 … The following products are manufactured using aborted fetal cells: PEPSI BEVERAGES …. the dead DNA fetus cells into. You know these …It’s not just Pepsi: drug, food, cosmetic companies use aborted baby …
Mar 5, 2012 … … and tissues derived from aborted babies to develop their products, … road, beating us and leaving us half-dead, and we will still love you.
Sickening: Major food corporations use tissue from aborted babies …
Apr 15, 2015 … Tags: aborted babies, flavor chemicals, food corporations …. using the cell tissue of unborn babies that were murdered through abortion. … aborted human fetal tissue — many so-called “beauty products” and vaccines are also …
Tissue from aborted fetuses in makeup – snopes.com
Tissue from aborted fetuses in makeup Inboxer Rebellion. … you were looking for , but I did find this article, 101 Uses for a Dead (or Live) Baby.Aborted Human Fetuses Being Used For “Flavor Enhancer” Research
Feb 28, 2012 … Senomyx is using aborted fetal cells to develop their “flavors. …. products may contain the suffering and pain of murdered babies in the womb of …Hungarian court condemns black market sales of aborted fetal parts for
May 17, 2015 … Abortion in itself is tragic enough, but the penchant for people to use dead babies for such ventures as cosmetic development is an abhorrent …Nature itself mercifully causes spontaneous abortion of deformed fetuses? That’s how species survive. Fortunately this is true despite the religious fanatics who only view the world through their superstition.
Here’s a video which argues the abortion issue rationally and is free of religious mumbo-jumbo.
I can’t understand why someone not under the influence of superstitious religious dogma based on supernatural belief in a soul would consider an early fetus a person. Maybe someone opposed to birth control might take this philosophically bankrupt position. A potential person at best, but not a person. Why is the concept of a person as a sentient being so hard to differentiate from a bunch of brainless cells?
Life begins at conception, and the unborn child is a human being.
But the Bible isn’t alone in declaring this truth. Science also declares that an unborn child is just as much an independent human being as you. The original human cell consists of 46 chromosomes, 23 from each parent. At no point during pregnancy does the mother contribute any new cells to the child. The original cell divides itself and multiplies to provide development and growth for the child. Scientifically speaking, the child is just as independent at six months before birth as he will be six months after birth. Yes, the mother does provide nourishment to the unborn child, but she also provides nourishment to the newborn child!
At two weeks pregnancy, the “fetus” can move alone. By four weeks the child has limbs, muscle tissue, a heart and heartbeat. Ears, eyes, and small hands are visible by the fifth week. The child responds to touch sensations by the sixth or seventh week. At eight weeks, the baby sometimes tries to take a breath when removed from the mother. At twelve weeks, the child will often struggle for life two or three hours when removed from the mother.
( source: http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/abortion.html )
The bible is hardly a reliable source on science or biology and has no place in the moral beliefs of a free thinking atheist. The superstitious religious dogma does not apply here.
The fact is that that an early fetus is not a sentient human person until it exhibits some EEG brain activity. It is irrelevant what this group of cells can do with no conscious brain activity. It is not yet a person. That does not occur until the 3rd trimester. Look it up in any Obstetrics text.Damn guys, I didn’t mean for this to end in a debate about abortion. And this is exactly why I posted this in the political section. haha.
I do however, love most of their moral teachings. Especially about men.
I’ve been thinking about converting over to something like Zen Buddhism or Taoism not only because I don’t want to be associated with the atheist community, but because those religions have great MGTOW teachings as well.
Heres a MGTOW teaching from the bible:
Now therefore, my’sons, hearken unto me, And attend to the words of my mouth.
Let not thy heart decline to her ways; Go not astray in her paths. (Proverbs 7, 24-25)@ German truther
Once I told a man at my parents’ church that I was not interested in marriage and he said something negative about it. Then I smiled and asked him to explain the apostle Paul. He didn’t like that, hahaha. Thankfully he didn’t know I am atheist because then he probably would’ve been less tolerant my retort.
If it ever comes up again, I’ll say “What would Jesus do? (referencing the often said phrase) He sure didn’t marry!
@Tiga K
or Jesus which is also hilarious.
@ German truther
Once I told a man at my parents’ church that I was not interested in marriage and he said something negative about it. Then I smiled and asked him to explain the apostle Paul. He didn’t like that, hahaha. Thankfully he didn’t know I am atheist because then he probably would’ve been less tolerant my retort.
If it ever comes up again, I’ll say “What would Jesus do? (referencing the often said phrase) He sure didn’t marry!
to make it clear…
Let not thy heart decline to her ways; Go not astray in her paths. (Proverbs 7, 24-25)
is advice to all men, married or not. Its no advice that you should stay away from women or arent supposed to marry. Jesus and Paul both said that not all men are made for a celibate, but…“If there be any who can receive this saying, who can without marriage bridle his list, and so live in a solute and single state as not to sin against God by any extravagancy of lusts, and impure desires and affections, and desire, and shall do so, that he may be more spiritual, and serve God with less distraction, and be a more fit instrument to promote the kingdom of God in the world, let him do it.”
People that go to church usually dont know much about the bible, otherwise they probably wouldnt go there in the first place.
Matthew 6:1
“Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.Matthew 6:2
“So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.Corinthians 3:16
“Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst?”Atheists are a diverse set of people.
For f~~~’s sake… the question was about Athiesm+ not you and your own f~~~ing idea about what atheism means. Read OP’s goddamn post, people! What are we, a bunch of relativist SJWs now or what?!
I’ve been thinking about converting over to something like Zen Buddhism or Taoism not only because I don’t want to be associated with the atheist community, but because those religions have great MGTOW teachings as well.
Here’s the group: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism_Plus
Buddhism might be a rational choice for someone who wants to remain an atheist but wants to follow a religion based on ethics. Contrary to popular opinion Buddhists do not believe in a deity – it is a nontheistic religion. The Buddha is not worshiped as a god but just an enlightened person.
I once considered it myself but ended up rejecting it because I couldn’t accept the unscientific principles of reincarnation. I also had trouble with it’s central tenant that one must give up all desires to achieve true happiness. I could see this might work if one is desperately poor and unable to have anything but this belief can keep someone from striving for and gaining something. It is possible however to follow it’s ethical principles, such as respect for life and others without being a formal Buddhist.I’m Buddhist. So I’m biased in saying it’s a good way to live. It’s not a religion, since it doesn’t have a deity, although it does have its fair share of dogma, but at least one of the critical teachings of Gautama was to question everything.
I do believe in reincarnation, but I can understand the orthodox scientific view too. There is evidence of reincarnation, but none against it, funnily enough. Anyway, it’s a personal thing.
Giving up desires is actually to do with not holding on to them, rather than the Christian notion of abstinence and penury. By all means enjoy having sex, earning money, being the best you can be, generally enjoying life to the full, but don’t be too attached to it all, because when you get attached to something (that will inevitably change!) that’s where you are likely to experience loss and sadness (when if finally does change).
Then the question becomes, “where does beinghood begin as distinct from biological life?”.
I don’t claim to be an athiest any more than I claim to be a goyim or an infidel so I can’t speak to anyone’s organized belief but I’ll tell you where I stand on this as a rational (sometimes) man.
All living cells are alive. A sperm is alive and an egg is alive, so it’s silly to talk about the moment that the combination of a specific egg and a specific sperm becomes alive.
What is relevant, I suggest, are the point in time at which the results of that combination reach specific, meaningful milestones in its development. I propose that self sustainability is one… i.e. at what point could this new mass of cells exist independent of the mass of cells hosting it. Others would be points at which this mass of cells begins to process sensory input, create memories and develop a sense of individual identity and sentience.
We are not defining life here, we are defining the concept of “a life” to specify the point where we decide that a zygote is an independent entity worthy of protection as a human being.
I don’t have much of an issue with religion except when people try to force it upon me, and that really doesn’t happen often.
I am an athiest, and do not in any way see that as a “religion” any more than not watching football on TV is a “sport”. I don’t belong to atheist groups or subscribe to atheist newsletters or wear “kiss me, I’m atheist” t-shirts. I just don’t think of life and reality in any kind of religious context.
I don’t feel the need to berate anyone else for believing either. It’s not my business. Life can be a frightening, challenging, annoying mess. If having a belief makes it easier to take, go for it! I certainly have no answers. For me, religion doesn’t work, can’t work because I can’t force myself to believe. It would just be an act. If it makes it easier for you to get out of bed in the morning, go for it!
I don’t however, have any patience at all for someone insisting that I come over to their way of thinking. I don’t listen to preachers, missionaries or the like any more than I would to Scientology weenies or Moonies. I find it all uninteresting."I am is reportedly the shortest sentence in the English language. Could it be that I do is the longest sentence?" - George Carlin
There is evidence of reincarnation, but none against it, funnily enough
so you come here, saying theres evidence of reincarnation and then not present it to us?
cmon show it please…rather than the Christian notion of abstinence and penury
I call that bulls~~~ but proove me wrong with the bible. Show me where it says that christians are supposed to live in abstinence and penury, and I will proove you wrong right after, deal?
Yeah, I feel the same for the most part. However, I do enjoy some Buddhist and Taoist teachings. Even though I’m not a Buddhist, most of their main teachings I adhere to. Hell, I’ve even adhered to those teachings well before I even read them.
But most religious things I can’t even accept like all the supernatural bulls~~~ that comes with religion. However, with the rise of atheism plus, more and more people will just see atheism as another religion. Which is one thing that’s making me question my stance.
more and more people will just see atheism as another religion. Which is one thing that’s making me question my stance
People who think of atheism as a religion tend to be people who just can’t fathom life without a religion. Often it’s people who grew up with one, then walked away from it for some reason.
The idea of a deity would probably never enter my mind if someone didn’t ask me about it, but believers think atheists sit around pondering the non-existence of god in response to life’s questions. If someone asks me whether I believe, I say no. If nobody asks, I simply don’t think about it. I have yet to have an atheist try to start a conversation about the lack of a god, or attempt to get me to not attend a meeting with like-minded non-believers to not worship that same lack in the proper way as was not recorded in non-existent ancient scriptures."I am is reportedly the shortest sentence in the English language. Could it be that I do is the longest sentence?" - George Carlin
I am an athiest, and do not in any way see that as a “religion” any more than not watching football on TV is a “sport”.
Not watching football on TV becomes a sport when you spend your free time telling people how stupid football is. Same with atheism.
I, personally, am no more “a-theistic” than I am “a-unicornistic” or “a-tinkerbellistic”. In other words, people can feel free to believe whatever they want but i don’t care to engage them in talking about it.
@DocFenderson
That’s more or less my stance on this whole thing now. Not to mention, the term was used to describe Christians. The original word, “atheos” meant “without god” and it was used to describe the ever growing number of Christians. Then, Christians took over and used that to describe nonreligious people.
I’ve actually met atheists such as that. However, it’s mainly in online atheist communities.
______________________________________________________________________________________
The more I think about, the more I come to believe that the term “atheist” is just as stupid as the term “asantaclausist” or “aunicornist”
Haha! I didn’t want to derail the topic, and it’s an entirely personal belief, not one I intend to foist on anyone, but since you asked:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbWMEWubrk0- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
