Atheism - a desperate and dying breed?

[ianb321red]

Christianity is also a dying breed.

But one thing it doesn't feel the need to do is to try and distort, deceive and kid itself that it is more relevant than it is.

Christianity isn't relevant to most people. We know that, it's unfortunate but the church in this country is largely to blame for the state of apathy that exists. I'm not even going to try and argue this point - the state of Christianity in this country is a shambles and I am not proud of this.

Atheism on the other hand seems to keep thinking it is more and more relevent - that outing yourself as an atheist is liberating, and that atheism is becoming more and more "normal".

Atheism UK have BOLDLY claimed that "As atheists, Clegg & Miliband are viewed more positively". This false claim is based on this recent piece of research:

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...r1cpg/TimesResults_150209_atheism_Website.pdf

They claim "Both Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg have stated they are atheists. Perhaps surprisingly, these statements make voters view them more positively (10-11%) rather than more negatively (6%)."

Is this claim correct though - or totally misleading? Well look at the research.

11% viewed Clegg more positively because of his atheism, BUT
6% viewed him more negatively
72% said NO DIFFERENCE (view still +ve/ -ve)
11% said "don't know"

Isn't the major find here that actually Clegg's atheism (and Milibands) makes fundamentally absolutely no difference to people? It's completely irrelevant?

Why doesn't atheism UK report the facts and evidence correctly?
Remember - atheism is about dealing with the evidence in a rational and reasoned way. It should also be about dealing with it honestly.

It's tricks like this that completely undermine any possibility of taking what this organisation stands for remotely seriously.

I appreciate peoples right and choice to lack a belief in God, but there has to be a more credible and fundamentally authentic and believable way of arguing the case of "no god" than any of the current organisations out there....

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Christianity is also a dying breed.

But one thing it doesn't feel the need to do is to try and distort, deceive and kid itself that it is more relevant than it is.

Christianity isn't relevant to most people. We know that, it's unfortunate but the church in this country is largely to blame for the state of apathy that exists. I'm not even going to try and argue this point - the state of Christianity in this country is a shambles and I am not proud of this.

Atheism on the other hand seems to keep thinking it is more and more relevent - that outing yourself as an atheist is liberating, and that atheism is becoming more and more "normal".

But it is increasingly normal to be atheist. Which demonstrates an error in your thread title.

Atheism UK have BOLDLY claimed that "As atheists, Clegg & Miliband are viewed more positively". This false claim is based on this recent piece of research:

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...r1cpg/TimesResults_150209_atheism_Website.pdf

They claim "Both Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg have stated they are atheists. Perhaps surprisingly, these statements make voters view them more positively (10-11%) rather than more negatively (6%)."

Is this claim correct though - or totally misleading? Well look at the research.

11% viewed Clegg more positively because of his atheism, BUT
6% viewed him more negatively
72% said NO DIFFERENCE (view still +ve/ -ve)
11% said "don't know"

Isn't the major find here that actually Clegg's atheism (and Milibands) makes fundamentally absolutely no difference to people? It's completely irrelevant?

Why doesn't atheism UK report the facts and evidence correctly?

They have reported it correctly. Surely even you can understand that an 11% increase of people with a positive view is greater than a 6% increase of people with a negative view.

Remember - atheism is about dealing with the evidence in a rational and reasoned way. It should also be about dealing with it honestly.

It's tricks like this that completely undermine any possibility of taking what this organisation stands for remotely seriously.

The only trickery here is you making erroneous claims.

I appreciate peoples right and choice to lack a belief in God, but there has to be a more credible and fundamentally authentic and believable way of arguing the case of "no god" than any of the current organisations out there....

How is this report making a case for no god?

I fail to see how any of this post supports the claim made in the title.

 

[andy b]

clegg and milliband are viewed as no bodies in a political sense in fact its a big no no for any atheist group to be connected with these two whoppers

 

[Robban]

Christianity is also a dying breed.

But one thing it doesn't feel the need to do is to try and distort, deceive and kid itself that it is more relevant than it is.

Christianity isn't relevant to most people. We know that, it's unfortunate but the church in this country is largely to blame for the state of apathy that exists. I'm not even going to try and argue this point - the state of Christianity in this country is a shambles and I am not proud of this.

Atheism on the other hand seems to keep thinking it is more and more relevent - that outing yourself as an atheist is liberating, and that atheism is becoming more and more "normal".

Atheism UK have BOLDLY claimed that "As atheists, Clegg & Miliband are viewed more positively". This false claim is based on this recent piece of research:

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...r1cpg/TimesResults_150209_atheism_Website.pdf

They claim "Both Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg have stated they are atheists. Perhaps surprisingly, these statements make voters view them more positively (10-11%) rather than more negatively (6%)."

Is this claim correct though - or totally misleading? Well look at the research.

11% viewed Clegg more positively because of his atheism, BUT
6% viewed him more negatively
72% said NO DIFFERENCE (view still +ve/ -ve)
11% said "don't know"

Isn't the major find here that actually Clegg's atheism (and Milibands) makes fundamentally absolutely no difference to people? It's completely irrelevant?

Why doesn't atheism UK report the facts and evidence correctly?
Remember - atheism is about dealing with the evidence in a rational and reasoned way. It should also be about dealing with it honestly.

It's tricks like this that completely undermine any possibility of taking what this organisation stands for remotely seriously.

I appreciate peoples right and choice to lack a belief in God, but there has to be a more credible and fundamentally authentic and believable way of arguing the case of "no god" than any of the current organisations out there....

Could be as soon as Christianity became a religion.

Though, what is Christianity?

Has it lost the plot?

Does anyone want to have anything to do a bunch of wannabes?

Has it become an idol?

Is there any salt?

Is it a pocket book thing?



What is the core?

Does it worship a ball and chain god?

Is it slavery?

Just a few questions anyone can ask themselves, without Consulting Rabbi Google.

Most religions have their rituals, maybe that,s what makes them religions.

To be set free, some may say,

set free from what,

from sin they reply,

ok, if that is the case,

So what,

You don,t sin anymore?

Nothing, or very, very rarely anything about eternity is laid down within us.

This from what I see when I track down and discover the plot in the story.

As for atheists, probably they don,t have much respect for Christian because they see through them.

Of course not all, mostly those who make a big number of it.

Just shaking their hand is like getting hold of a dead fish.

Pretty spooky actually.

 

[Paradoxum]

What they said was correct and honest.

It's also correct and honest to say that most people don't care.

 

[andy b]

What they said was correct and honest.

It's also correct and honest to say that most people don't care.

if im honest and i try to be i don't care what the beliefs are of politicians as long as they do the job well.. but lets be honest doxer who cares what these two think they are political non entities

 

[yesyoushould]

God bless the truth.

 

[Paradoxum]

if im honest and i try to be i don't care what the beliefs are of politicians as long as they do the job well.. but lets be honest doxer who cares what these two think they are political non entities

Well Ed could be PM, and Nick is Deputy PM. I wouldn't call that irrelevant.

 

[andy b]

Well Ed could be PM, and Nick is Deputy PM. I wouldn't call that irrelevant.

clegg has sacrificed his beliefs for power and ed his brother ....thats two things i could never do and im not a politician

 

[Genersis]

It's sad that people think less or more of individuals just because of the religion they identify as a follower of, or alternatively, don't.

 

[ianb321red]

Does anyone disagree that the primary finding from this question was that 72% said it made "no difference"?

Does anyone disagree with this?

If not, then 72% said that atheism was irrelevant to their view of either politician.

That is the KEY finding - NOT that 10% viewed either politician more favourably because of atheism - a point that is even more pointless when we realise that those 10% were actually 100% atheists!!

The issue I have is that the NGO in question here saw fit to make a press release to make a positive statement about atheism from research that clearly showed that atheism was irrelevant! I just see this as a really desperate thing to have to do.....

I respect a more honest approach

 

[ianb321red]

But it is increasingly normal to be atheist.

Where in this research do you get this claim from?

You've said "increasingly" - but there is only 1 data point. There are no data trends so how can something be "increasingly" when you have no past data to compare it back against?

 

[Paradoxum]

clegg has sacrificed his beliefs for power and ed his brother ....thats two things i could never do and im not a politician

Can't compromise be made for the greater good? You could say that some Lib Dem influence is better than none.

I don't know what the Miliband brothers relationship is like.

 

[Robban]

It's sad that people think less or more of individuals just because of the religion they identify as a follower of, or alternatively, don't.

Anyone who cuts off a hand of a thief, is not exactly on my "Top of the pops list"

 

[King Mob]

Does anyone disagree that the primary finding from this question was that 72% said it made "no difference"?

Does anyone disagree with this?

If not, then 72% said that atheism was irrelevant to their view of either politician.

That is the KEY finding - NOT that 10% viewed either politician more favourably because of atheism - a point that is even more pointless when we realise that those 10% were actually 100% atheists!!

The issue I have is that the NGO in question here saw fit to make a press release to make a positive statement about atheism from research that clearly showed that atheism was irrelevant! I just see this as a really desperate thing to have to do.....

I respect a more honest approach

I couldn't give a s--t what each individual proclaims him/herself to be. Is that honest enough for you?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Where in this research do you get this claim from?

You've said "increasingly" - but there is only 1 data point. There are no data trends so how can something be "increasingly" when you have no past data to compare it back against?

Your statement was not based on this report, so why must my counter statement be based on it? If you want supporting evidence check UK census results.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

If not, then 72% said that atheism was irrelevant to their view of either politician.

That is the KEY finding - NOT that 10% viewed either politician more favourably because of atheism - a point that is even more pointless when we realise that those 10% were actually 100% atheists!!

Is it your contention that the only finding that may be published is the one you consider most noteworthy?

The issue I have is that the NGO in question here saw fit to make a press release to make a positive statement about atheism from research that clearly showed that atheism was irrelevant! I just see this as a really desperate thing to have to do.....

Statistically 10% is not irrelevant.

I respect a more honest approach

There was no dishonesty in the approach. The report even calls the findings surprising. Do you really mean you respect an approach which supports your contention?

 

[fat wee robin]

Does anyone disagree that the primary finding from this question was that 72% said it made "no difference"?

Does anyone disagree with this?

If not, then 72% said that atheism was irrelevant to their view of either politician.

That is the KEY finding - NOT that 10% viewed either politician more favourably because of atheism - a point that is even more pointless when we realise that those 10% were actually 100% atheists!!

The issue I have is that the NGO in question here saw fit to make a press release to make a positive statement about atheism from research that clearly showed that atheism was irrelevant! I just see this as a really desperate thing to have to do.....

I respect a more honest approach

Maybe in Britain there is indifference ,but here in Europe no there is not the same deadness of spirit,but then commerce ,military power, etc were always more important to England than anything else,so it does not surprise me.

For the poster there is hope ,as France slowly but surely arises from her atheist grave ,and takes life again i Jesus.Yes really .

 

[LionL]

A politician's religion, or lack of, does matter to me. I would be less likely to vote for a religious person because their policies may be influenced by their faith. That's fine if they are helping the poor etc, but they may also victimise homosexuals, people who are not married or maybe members of another religion. I am reminded of Tony Blair, a Catholic, who took this country to war on a lie. The consequences of his actions are still being felt today.

 

[Inkfingers]

Isn't the major find here that actually Clegg's atheism (and Milibands) makes fundamentally absolutely no difference to people? It's completely irrelevant?

I think it's more fair to simply say that no amount of Atheism or Religion can alter the view that these men are untrustworthy.