Atheism

[createdtoworship]

YOU brought up Wikipedia and other dictionaries. I was pointing out your misunderstanding.



Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2][3] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3][4][5]

See the bolded part, especially what is in red. It is so clearly worded there just isn't any point to putting that in my own words.



Yes, I do. Do you? Did you notice the words "in a broad sense", "in a narrow sense", and "most inclusively"? What do those words mean to you?


eudaimonia,

Mark

I am unsure. all I know is that you have no dictionaries that agree with you on the definition of athiest and now also chaplain.

You can't quote wikipedia for your definition of atheism because when you do that All I have to do is quote the same engine for chaplaincy. You see?

also I think your group was rejected for being a chaplain, as they are not on their schedule at the base they were trying to get on.

So not even the military agrees with your definition of chaplaincy and athiesm.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I am unsure. all I know is that you have no dictionaries that agree with you on the definition of athiest and now also chaplain.

That's good because I'm an atheist, and therefore Webster isn't my God.

You can't quote wikipedia for your definition of atheism because when you do that All I have to do is quote the same engine for chaplaincy. You see?

Of course. I never pretended that we could settle anything with dictionaries. I was pointing out your misunderstanding of the Wikipedia article.

So not even the military agrees with your definition of chaplaincy and athiesm.

Give it time.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[createdtoworship]

Give it time.

that was 2011 when they did that. So basically your saying that the definition of chaplaincy must incorporate non religious services, like boyscouts and cubscout services too?

 

[TScott]

comming from someone with a signature like yours, I can imagine why you would say this. However I disagree, One of the largest Christian colleges has 65000 students, only 17,000 are actually at the college, the rest.....internet baby!

Are you aware that on almost every post you reply to on this board, you COMPLETELY miss the point that the poster has directed at you, and instead focus on some tangental aspect of the post. It's hard for me to believe you are not aware that you are doing this since nearly everyone here has pointed it out to you.

 

[createdtoworship]

Are you aware that on almost every post you reply to on this board, you COMPLETELY miss the point that the poster has directed at you, and instead focus on some tangental aspect of the post. It's hard for me to believe you are not aware that you are doing this since nearly everyone here has pointed it out to you.

I understand the points of the post, but then reply with my own rebuttal. Thats okay isn't it? You should have to say "i agree" with everything to be in a debate do we?

 

[quatona]

athiesm according to wikipedia is belief in the absence of a diety

Did you actually read the article?

Atheism is contrasted with theism,[6][7] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.[7][8]

so yes athiesm means "God does not exist"

No, doesn´t follow.

here are more dictionaries that say Athiest means "God does not exist"
Atheism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Origin:
1565&#8211;75; < Greek áthe(os) godless + -ist

from

Atheist | Define Atheist at Dictionary.com

atheist - definition of atheist by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Definition for atheist - Oxford Dictionaries Online (US English)

atheist noun - definition in British English Dictionary & Thesaurus - Cambridge Dictionary Online

You are free to decide whether you prefer to discuss with me about my opinions, or with a dictionary about the definitions it provides.
If you are looking for someone whose views, positions and stance are accurately described by "God does not exist", I am the wrong person.

 

[TScott]

I understand the points of the post, but then reply with my own rebuttal. Thats okay isn't it? You should have to say "i agree" with everything to be in a debate do we?

Dude, you did it again. This response had nothing to do with what I posted. Not once in my post did I say the word agree, or even hint that I was looking for agreement.

 

[Eudaimonist]

that was 2011 when they did that. So basically your saying that the definition of chaplaincy must incorporate non religious services, like boyscouts and cubscout services too?

Must? No, I hadn't said anything like that. I merely suggested that the definition might change over time as attitudes change. Word definitions aren't written in stone. English is a living language.

As for the Boyscouts, aren't they a private group?

IMV, governments ought to be even-handed in their treatment of individuals, not granting anyone special treatment due to their religious beliefs or lack thereof, nor attempting to deprive anyone of places to congregate (such as churches that they own), nor attempting to force anyone to live a certain way simply for religious reasons.

Private groups are a different matter. As long as they don't receive government funding, or at least benefit only in trivial ways from tax money, I think they should be free to be as exclusively religious as they want.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[createdtoworship]

Must? No, I hadn't said anything like that. I merely suggested that the definition might change over time as attitudes change. Word definitions aren't written in stone. English is a living language.

As for the Boyscouts, aren't they a private group?

IMV, governments ought to be even-handed in their treatment of individuals, not granting anyone special treatment due to their religious beliefs or lack thereof, nor attempting to deprive anyone of places to congregate (such as churches that they own), nor attempting to force anyone to live a certain way simply for religious reasons.

Private groups are a different matter. As long as they don't receive government funding, or at least benefit only in trivial ways from tax money, I think they should be free to be as exclusively religious as they want.


eudaimonia,

Mark

wait a minute, an atheist should be paid from the government to perform non religious service but a boyscout cannot be paid to perform non religious service? See how hypocritical that sounds? If an athiest who is non religious can be a chaplain, than any body and their brother can be one including any charities or non prophet groups like green peace and united way. They can have chaplains too (because they are non religious).

 

[Eudaimonist]

wait a minute, an atheist should be paid from the government to perform non religious service but a boyscout cannot be paid to perform non religious service? See how hypocritical that sounds?

The military is a governmental organization, a basic function of government, and in war situations chaplains are likely the only source of emotional support for soldiers, so I can tolerate chaplains being funded with tax money as long as there is a reasonable effort at inclusivity (such as having atheist chaplains). It might be too much to ask to have chaplains "pull their own weight" by having only private or charitable funding.

The Boyscouts, however, are a private group, and they shouldn't be receiving money for religious purposes. Think about this a moment. Do we really want state churches that are funded by tax dollars? The Founding Fathers fought against that idea.

There is no hypocricy here. I'm considering different contexts. I'm cutting the military a little slack because of very special circumstances.

If an athiest who is non religious can be a chaplain, than any body and their brother can be one including any charities or non prophet groups like green peace and united way. They can have chaplains too (because they are non religious).

Can you think of any reason why a member of Green Peace or the United Way should be barred from being hired as a chaplain in the military?

Or did you mean that they should get tax-funded chaplains from the government? I don't see why any tax-funded chaplains should exist outside of the military.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[createdtoworship]

Can you think of any reason why a member of Green Peace or the United Way should be barred from being hired as a chaplain in the military?

Or did you mean that they should get tax-funded chaplains from the government? I don't see why any tax-funded chaplains should exist outside of the military.

I was meaning military chaplains. But green peace and united way should not have any chaplain duties because they are non religious. They have been trying to oust the chaplaincy for awhile...Because of it's religious affiliations.

 

[Ken-1122]

wait a minute, an atheist should be paid from the government to perform non religious service but a boyscout cannot be paid to perform non religious service? See how hypocritical that sounds? If an athiest who is non religious can be a chaplain, than any body and their brother can be one including any charities or non prophet groups like green peace and united way. They can have chaplains too (because they are non religious).

Are you kidding me??? Are you suggesting they have Atheist Chaplains? What do they do? Who do they pray to? Sounds like the dumbest thing in the world to me; am I missing something?

Ken

 

[createdtoworship]

Are you kidding me??? Are you suggesting they have Atheist Chaplains? What do they do? Who do they pray to? Sounds like the dumbest thing in the world to me; am I missing something?

Ken

they made a request to the army last year, and were denied. Probably because they are not religious. What would they do? It's like a pacifist joining the military. Nothing to do.

 

[Ken-1122]

they made a request to the army last year, and were denied. Probably because they are not religious. What would they do? It's like a pacifist joining the military. Nothing to do.

Yeah like I said; it's gotta be one of the dumbest things in the world

Ken

 

[createdtoworship]

Yeah like I said; it's gotta be one of the dumbest things in the world

Ken

yeah they call it "chaplaincy reform."

we know how reform works, you change it, change it, until there is nothing left!

 

[Eudaimonist]

Are you kidding me??? Are you suggesting they have Atheist Chaplains? What do they do? Who do they pray to? Sounds like the dumbest thing in the world to me; am I missing something?

Yes, you are missing something, Ken.

Atheists are no less in need of a similarly minded person to speak with in confidence about moral issues and questions of meaning. Soldiers who bottle such things up are not likely to be effective as soldiers.

So, yes, there are roles for atheist chaplains.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[createdtoworship]

Yes, you are missing something, Ken.

Atheists are no less in need of a similarly minded person to speak with in confidence about moral issues and questions of meaning. Soldiers who bottle such things up are not likely to be effective as soldiers.

So, yes, there are roles for atheist chaplains.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Does this sound rational?
boyscouts who bottle up their emotions about boyscouting are not as effective as soldiers! I would say get a grip. Boyscouts are a private group yes but they are still a group thats not religious like athiests. Why should athiests get a shot at chaplaincy while everyone else rots. (boyscouts, united way, habitat for humanity etc)..

Religion is actually what offers the comfort, not lack thereof (in the case of athiesm).

 

[Eudaimonist]

Does this sound rational?
boyscouts who bottle up their emotions about boyscouting are not as effective as soldiers! I would say get a grip.

Boyscouts don't kill people.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[createdtoworship]

Boyscouts don't kill people.


eudaimonia,

Mark

boyscouts go through 20 years old, army starts at 17. So yes boyscouts can be soldiers. Are you saying that those two years are not valid for a group to get chaplains? I would venture to say the majority of soldiers are younger rather than older!

 

[Ken-1122]

Yes, you are missing something, Ken.

Atheists are no less in need of a similarly minded person to speak with in confidence about moral issues and questions of meaning. Soldiers who bottle such things up are not likely to be effective as soldiers.

So, yes, there are roles for atheist chaplains.


eudaimonia,

Mark

That is what counselors are for. I have no objection to counseling being made availible for those of no religion, but chaplains, priests, pastors, etc are for religious people; not atheists.
I get a little irritated when I see people trying to turn atheism into just another religion, and it is even worse when atheists try to do it.

Ken