First Atheist in US Congress

[redhotswami]

^please do share what polls this came from.

by the way, i need to step in here and say something, because i'm so tired of people equating spirituality with stupidity. i see it happening again and again and that assumption right there is ignorant itself. is it really that hard for people from either side to respect the other's beliefs? sheesh!!!

sorry for the rant, but i'm tired of this. beliefs are debatable, but respect is not.

back to topic

 

[deep]

I would be willing to bet that Stark isn't the only atheist / non believer in there. Out of 535 people, that would be really doubtful. For the most part, people in Congress are intelligent and very well educated (yeah, I know there are some idiots in there, too), and polls have shown that the better educated are less likely to believe in a supreme being.

The others won't admit it for fear of not being re-elected.

I think many and perhaps most people fall more into the agnostic camp

is it really possible to say

their is no God? or supreme being of any kind?




I currently believe there is very little likelihood of any intelligent life (something that has language, that we could communicate with) in space.

But, I will not say that there is no possibility out there

I guess I am agnostic on other life in space

I am also agnostic on the concept of God

but I am a 100% believer in morals and ethics for the betterment of all humankind

for a better world, here and now
and to leave to our children

 

[A_Wanderer]

Embracing a belief without any evidence to lend support or any plausible means of objective validation may not be stuoid but it involves willful suspension of reason, and the idea that we should somehow respect these concepts is equally absurd.

is it really possible to say

their is no God? or supreme being of any kind?

If there is no need for God or evidence for God then it doesn't factor into existential considerations; if there was some plausible evidence pointing to such higher order then one could reasonably be agnostic but in the absence of such evidence I find the idea of it to be both unfounded and a lazy sokution (how does one uncover how God works, was formed and what rules it obeys?).

 

[redhotswami]

Embracing a belief without any evidence to lend support or any plausible means of objective validation may not be stuoid but it involves willful suspension of reason, and the idea that we should somehow respect these concepts is equally absurd.

but that is all relative. we have our own temperaments, our own ways of processing and absorbing the world around us. your methods of analysis are different from mine. what works for me doesn't work for you, vice versa. this applies to more than just spirituality.

 

[A_Wanderer]

but that is all relative. we have our own temperaments, our own ways of processing and absorbing the world around us. your methods of analysis are different from mine. what works for me doesn't work for you, vice versa. this applies to more than just spirituality.

But it's a bigger issue than how animals comprehend their world, the universe was in a state of existence before humanity came along and it didn't neccessitate God then; we can only break down the subjective bias of our own minds with the scientific method.

Just because your truth feels just as valid to you as mine does to me doesn't make either inherently correct.

 

[medmo]

^please do share what polls this came from.

by the way, i need to step in here and say something, because i'm so tired of people equating spirituality with stupidity. i see it happening again and again and that assumption right there is ignorant itself. is it really that hard for people from either side to respect the other's beliefs? sheesh!!!

sorry for the rant, but i'm tired of this. beliefs are debatable, but respect is not.

back to topic

I wasn't equating spirituality with stupidity, and if it sounded like I was, that wasn't my intention. I was referring to a poll I remembered reading. I didn't just make it up.

72% of Americans with high school diplomas or less are 'absolutely certain' there is a supreme being. For those with post graduate degrees, that percentage is 53.

Here is the poll; scroll down to table 2 to see what I'm talking about, but the entire poll is interesting.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=408

 

[deep]

If there is no need for God or evidence for God then it doesn't factor into existential considerations; if there was some plausible evidence pointing to such higher order then one could reasonably be agnostic but in the absence of such evidence I find the idea of it to be both unfounded and a lazy sokution (how does one uncover how God works, was formed and what rules it obeys?).

with your line of logic

there would have been a time when one could argue there are no germs

because I can not see them (say the year 1000- 1100 A D)

or dark matter and dark energy that Scienece seems to be in complete agreement with (say any time before 1900 A D)


and even Eiensteine did not believe in Black holes when he died in the 1950s


all of these could use your argument that they saw no evidence


I do appreciate various Religious claims may be very specific
and evidence of support that should be there may not be there

But, I tend to think Atheists may be a bit lazy, because I do not see it, It is not true and cannot be true.

 

[deep]

I wasn't equating spirituality with stupidity, and if it sounded like I was, that wasn't my intention. I was referring to a poll I remembered reading. I didn't just make it up.

72% of Americans with high school diplomas or less are 'absolutely certain' there is a supreme being. For those with post graduate degrees, that percentage is 53.

Here is the poll; scroll down to table 2 to see what I'm talking about, but the entire poll is interesting.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=408

I guess this supports my belief

that most people fall into some degree of agnostic belief

this is what I find in general conversation
in religious people, they say something that reveals they have some doubt

and most self-professed atheist will admit that there is a possibility of a supreme being, some do want to stress a very, very remote possibility

 

[A_Wanderer]

Hold out on the issues of dark matter and dark energy since cosmologists are reinventing the universe for every new batch of data - it is not fixed; but your right and the changes in knowledge shows how we should approach the world, we know nothing - we can only understand it on the basis of evidence and our understanding is only as good as our evidence, the base assumptions - now in the absence of any evidence for God there is no cause to take the existence of such a powers existence as anything more than a thought experiment - if we discovered evidence then that would change, I wouldn't oppose that solution if there was very persuasive evidence.

On all the multiple working hypothesis of the universe having a being of unknown origin and undefined power create it has a very low confidence level.

 

[medmo]

I guess this supports my belief

that most people fall into some degree of agnostic belief

this is what I find in general conversation
in religious people, they say something that reveals they have some doubt

and most self-professed atheist will admit that there is a possibility of a supreme being, some do want to stress a very, very remote possibility

Yep. And all I was saying was that in a group of 535 people, most of them well educated, statistically there is almost certainly more than one atheist.

 

[deep]

On all the multiple working hypothesis of the universe having a being of unknown origin and undefined power create it has a very low confidence level.

following the atheist model


what was?
before the big bang, or before what we call time?

and why and how did it start?

what was the power behind that?

is this where a supreme being model can fit

and yes I know the next question
who/ what created said supreme being ?

 

[A_Wanderer]

The time dimension is thought to be a concequence of the big bang, how could a deity function without time?

And apart from that all of these points are uttery untestable and as I said before thought experiments.

 

[deep]

and again

I would say because we can not (in 2007) explain, define or find a testable device to support a supreme being

dose not negate the possibility

in 1007 A D one would not have been able to present a testable device to support cell phones, man made satellites, you get the point


perhaps at this point in time we are the Tibetan sheepherders that can not comphrehend of what an iPod is
and if a neighbor came back from a trip and said he was able to hear all of the world in his head

he would be considered a liar or delusional

 

[A_Wanderer]

The examples you give are of inventions, things that did not exist in 1007 and could be brought to remote tribes and demonstrated today, the issue of God seems to concern the origin of life and humans; the origins of life is still a difficult problem, but one where the mechanisms are grounded in naturalistic causes not supernatural intervention, humans however are more clear cut as being another animal and product of evolution.

If we are talking about the origin of the universe (if there was an origin - if the universe or permutations of it have existed for infinite then there is no need for a beginning and hence no need to posit a creator) then it is a more open ended question; but it is still one where evidence is not putting up a big picture of "God Was Here" and drawing people to that conclusion.

The burden of proof rests on those making the case for God; when there is no evidence for something I find it hard to say that the possibility of God is just as probable as it's inexistence.

 

[deep]

The examples you give are of inventions,

very good point

i should have used discoveries.

That would have been better.


And I still remain agnostic.

And through our discussions I seem to sense a small crack in your Atheist armor, towards Agnostic - leaning most likely no supreme being

I do not expect you to become a religious believer

 

[VertigoGal]

Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?

Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.

Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?

Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.

Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?

Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists.

is this real?

 

[deep]

is this real?

short answer

no


looks like GHW Bush 1 did say something in 1987 - not W

 

[DrTeeth]

In hindsight, I've voted for Christians, Muslims and Atheists. Religious beliefs (or lack thereof) of a politician does not matter to me unless that person is determined to turn their personal beliefs into law and restrict other people's freedoms. And from that perspective, and from the outside looking in, it does seem that the US' congress could do with a lot more diversity and this is at least a good (first) step.

On the atheism/agnosticism subject: Of course you can always say there's a chance that something exists even there is no reason or evidence to support it. But let's face it, nobody wants to keep the options open that there are colonies of Snorks living at the bottom of the Mediterranean, or that the Moon's core is made of cheese. So it's not that odd that people would consider themselves Atheists. Personally, I'm 99,999999% sure that there is no deity, do I now have to call myself Agnostic because of the remaining 0,000001%?

 

[VertigoGal]

I see, thanks. I don't know if I'm supposed to feel relieved at that.

well, good for this guy not being afraid to state it. I'm sure there are many more who are at least agnostics in all practicality, not that I can say I blame them for not speaking up.

I also agree with Lies- I know quite a lot of fundamentalist Christians who wouldn't vote for an atheist (or non-evangelical for that matter), but I live in their breeding ground...and even still the majority of Christians I know aren't that incredibly closed-minded. At least I don't think so.

 

[deep]

I'm 99,999999% sure that there is no deity, do I now have to call myself Agnostic because of the remaining 0,000001%?

You can be that sure?

 

[DrTeeth]

You can be that sure?

Yes you can, as sure as that there are no Snorks in the Mediterranean.

Obviously I'm using that number to illustrate my point.

 

[redhotswami]

I wasn't equating spirituality with stupidity, and if it sounded like I was, that wasn't my intention. I was referring to a poll I remembered reading. I didn't just make it up.

72% of Americans with high school diplomas or less are 'absolutely certain' there is a supreme being. For those with post graduate degrees, that percentage is 53.

Here is the poll; scroll down to table 2 to see what I'm talking about, but the entire poll is interesting.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=408

I'm sorry. I overreacted. Thanks for sharing the link. It wasn't directed at you, it was more that the whole statistic just unnerved me. You hit a tender spot. I'm just sensitive to that because I feel a lot of people (not saying you) judge those who have spiritual (not just religious...but spiritual in general) values simply for having them. Your post triggered that frustration in me and I'm sorry I responded that way.

 

[redhotswami]

Normal people will examine each issue for what it is and make decisions on candidates based on how they feel about particular issues. But normal people don't make good press and have better things to do than making such absurd statements as Bush or pumping out surveys "proving" that people hate atheists, etc.

That's very refreshing to hear. I was starting to have my doubts.

 

[medmo]

I'm sorry. I overreacted. Thanks for sharing the link. It wasn't directed at you, it was more that the whole statistic just unnerved me. You hit a tender spot. I'm just sensitive to that because I feel a lot of people (not saying you) judge those who have spiritual (not just religious...but spiritual in general) values simply for having them. Your post triggered that frustration in me and I'm sorry I responded that way.

No problem. I am from the South, and I get pissed when people equate that with being stupid / uneducated. So I understand where you are coming from and why you were ticked. And the only thing I was referring to is that statistically there is probably more than one atheist in Congress.

 

[Liesje]

I'm a closet Proclaimers fan, and they have a few "Christian" songs. I was listening to an album just now and this song sort of says everything I feel about a topic like this...

You make it sound easy
You say just hold your hand out don't you
You just hold your hand out don't you
That hope never leaves you
'Cos a light shines on that helps you to steer
Makes everything clear

Well it might in your world
But it doesn't in mine
I've been stumbling in the dark for years
And the light just made me blind

You say it lights every pathway
Shows me how to live life
For the rest of my days
For the rest of my days

But I can't put my faith in
Your words and demands
I believe in God alright
It's folk like you I just can't stand

You don't have to try and scare me
To reinforce my faith sir
'Cos I know that one day
I'll stand before my Maker

And if I'm found wanting
When my case is heard
It'll be by the Author
Not some interpreter of his words

You make it sound easy
You say just hold your hand out don't you
You just hold your hand out don't you
That hope never leaves you
'Cos a light shines on that helps you to steer
Makes everything clear

Well it might in your world
But it doesn't in mine
I've been stumbling in the dark for years
And the light just made me blind
Yeah the light just made me blind

 

[redhotswami]

I hadn;t heard of anything beyond 500 Miles!

 

[Liesje]

I hadn;t heard of anything beyond 500 Miles!

Yeah, I listened to them all the time as a kid b/c my mom loved them. That's actually one of my least favorite songs.

 

[Irvine511]

Yeah, I listened to them all the time as a kid b/c my mom loved them. That's actually one of my least favorite songs.

yes, but when you've had a few too many beers it's soooo much fun to scream "BA-DAH-DAH" at each other.

 

[meegannie]

I saw the Proclaimers live at a festival in Scotland. Me, another American, and a Kiwi trapped at the front of a crowd of drunk/high Proclaimers fans, and the only song we knew was "500 Miles."

 

[A_Wanderer]

yes, but when you've had a few too many beers it's soooo much fun to scream "BA-DAH-DAH" at each other.

Who knew that we shared customs with the gays