4/04/2016

the atheist's argument

the atheist's argument: "if me, who is thinking, concluded that there is no God, then those people who claim that there is one, must not be thinking". can you spot a logical mistake here?

i recently spoke with a friend who is atheist or agnostic (i still mix those up) and asked what would she do if her kid, raised without religion, would choose to become a member of religion. the answer is she would be fine with it, but she would not be happy about it, and consider it her failure as a mother. where is the freedom of choice here? how is this not different from what the members of a religion are constantly accused for? how is that not brainwashing?

it is not religion which is making people do bad things. it is people. people are bad, selfish and egocentric. and they want that others agree with them, no matter on which topic. this discussion about religion is like discussing color of someone's hair when they are getting behind the wheel drunk. it is simply not the point. if there was no religion people would find something else to fight over. maybe the color of the hair.

i just honestly don't care. the point is to be content with your life, without damaging the life of others. and how you do it i really don't care. and if you teach your kid to do the same that worked for you - i will say that's a very good idea, whatever it is. but don't think it's a disaster if they don't follow, if anyone doesn't follow. this is all so simple to me. am i an ignorant? if yes, then i can't even see why.