Sentences with phrase «basis of atheism»

An Afghan man has been granted asylum in Britain on the basis of his atheism, in what is thought to be the first decision of its kind.

An Afghan man is granted asylum in Britain on the basis of his atheism, in what is thought to be the first decision of its kind.

The Home Office have reportedly for the first time granted an asylum application on the basis of atheism.

I feel that the basis of atheism should be to live and let live.

on the base of his atheism: «When I come to my own beliefs, I find myself quite unable to discern any purpose in the universe, and still more unable to wish to discern one» — as if that nondiscernment by his own sole self was sufficient for his sweeping, voluminous irreverence.

Not exact matches

Atheism is no more of a faith - based religion, than bald is a type of hair style.

There is much that could be said about this, but I will stick with one thing, based on discussion at about the 2 minute mark: When atheists insist that atheism does not drive behavior, and then then campaign on behalf of atheism, ridicule religion and religious believers in the name of atheism, seek to change laws in favor of their atheistic positions, recommend the extermination of religion, and practice falsehoods like Dawkins's in support of atheism, they prove that their atheism drives their behavior and that their premise is false, disingenuous, and (as far as I can tell) useless for anything but giving atheism rhetorical cover from being implicated in atheists» atrocities.

you sir are practicing a religion one that means so much to you that you use it as your online name also please show me where I call you a fool or is telling someone not to make a fool of themself the same as calling them a fool which would mean you are very religious as far as Colin he said nothing that related to the debate I was in with you... we are talking about Atheism as a religious view not debating the existence of God now look over the definitions I have shown you and please explain how Atheism does not fit into the said definitions And you claim that evolution is true so the burden of proof falls in your lap as it is the base of your religion.

Since Atheism is the absence of religion & isn't based on faith this ban only applies to religious groups & churches.

The universe is 13.7 billion years old (cosmology: best estimate based on available data)- nothing to do with Atheism The earth is 4.5 billion years old (cosmology: best estimate based on available data)- nothing to do with Atheism Life emerged from non-life (Biogenesis theory... cause and process unknown)- nothing to do with Atheism Life spread and diversified through evolution (best available explanation)- nothing to do with Atheism Man evolved from common ape ancestor (evolution science)- nothing to do with Atheism Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain (neuroscience)- nothing to do with Atheism Emotions, memories and intelligence are functions of the brain (neuroscience)- nothing to do with Atheism Morals are emergent qualities of social animals (natural science)- nothing to do with Atheism

Mormons and Mormonism provides a beautiful argument for atheism, in giving a great example showing the nature of religious belief: Based on unreal fabrications, sprinkled with bizarre claims.

I asked the question to understand how (and if) it is possible to separate science from atheism in the minds of believers so we can truly discuss the concepts based on their evidentiary merits, not necessarily their philosophical implications if indeed there are any to be had.

Strictly based on the color of skin, or the religious orientation, it is atheism that suffers the most prejudice.

There may be many types of beliefs that have atheism as their core, just as all the «Theist» based religions.

That is where you have beliefs — you can have beliefs that have atheism as their base, just like you «can» have theists without any «flavor» Generally to have something (vs the absence of something) you have to have some context which is why you have to have a belief system / religion attached to a God.

Strong atheism, to which I was referring, is an pro active ideology that in a nutshell rejects the possibility of the existence of God based on the presupposition that belief in such a being is logically contradictory.

As I've stated before, I believe the ideology of progressivism / liberalism is based on atheism.

finisher, What is the basis of your «questioning of atheism»?

Soviet policy toward religion was based on the ideology of Marxism - Leninism, which made atheism the official doctrine of the Soviet Union.

If you're atheism is not based out of reason then you are susceptible to some nonsense such as this.

Well, on the single word, but based on what was discussed earlier it is clear that such statement is at least not always true — especially in the case of implicit atheism.

Communism was not a path of atheism based on reason and rationality but rather from an ideology that took its teachings from religious totalitarianism.

This is a poor ad - hominem argument, as these people did not kill anyone based on the idea of atheism.

All the «harm done by religion», pales in comparison to the true harm done by atheism and scientism... just see Mao's secular Communist revolution in China (millions of Christians killed, churches outlawed), Hitler's science / eugenics - based «building of a better man», Stalinism, Castro's Cuba, or Kim's North Korea.

hinduism racism is based on dog ism, atheism, self center ism, not of human but animals, identify Aatheism, self center ism, not of human but animals, identify AtheismAtheism.

The difference in the evangelism of atheism or science is that it's based on verifiable evidence to support those theories.

It's only exclusion when you try to turn atheism into this dogmatic struggle with any form of monotheism, with the same ridiculous notions of superiority based on human thinking and logic which are always proven wrong.

In context here (given the «or») the «enlightenment ideal of human - based knowledge, reason and action» is code for atheism.

Mod is an action by a person in an environment, depending on legality or hinduism, illegality by hindu atheism, criminal self center ism, it has nothing to do with environment at large, as it is used today to define matters, because actions of a person are subject to scrutiny individually, not collectively, bases for call to treat individual acts as individually not collectively.

I have seen all the talk of atheism is based on what science can prove or disprove.

It is completely ironic to me that Atheists consistently cite that their «intellectual reasoning» is the sole statute upon which their viewpoint is based, and that any person of a decent intellect would secede to atheism.

@ monoya: Definition of BELIEF 1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing 2: something believed; especially: a tenet or body of tenets held by a group 3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence Atheism easily fits within these parameters.

This is not unbelief or atheism, it is a testing of God on the basis of a standard of justice.

But the fact remains that Christianity is based upon a belief in a deity... and Atheism is based upon a «complete rejection of the idea of deities».

The meaning of scripture can be twisted to serve the purposes of men so we must do everything that we can to ensure that the «Good Words» that are taught are the actual words of Yehoshua rather than the selected words of Paul and the Old Testament that form the basis of discrimination against women, racial minorities, homosexuals, and «different» religions (including atheism).

Atheism is based on clear minded objective observation of the real world.

And guess what, atheism isn't based on faith because by definition, atheism is LACK OF FAITH in a deity.

Cult religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, agnostics and all other form of religions that worship a man based earthly utopian system are ALL Antichrist because their net result is a unification / utilitarian approach at the expense of the truth of Christ.

While the Nazi party and the various ethnic cleansings in Armenia, the Balkans, and Africa were not really based upon atheism (thus making his argument that atheism has killed more folks than organized religion a bit shaky), ALL of the instances he mentions are bona - fide examples of almost incomprehensibly large numbers of deaths, NONE of which can be blamed, even remotely, on «organized religion.»

strictly speaking, atheism is not a religion, but scientifically amd based in the panthrotheistic faith they are part of the will of God to become active and organized at this point of our evolutionary stage of change from the present obsolescent religions to a future scientific faith.

On the basis of these two ifs, a return to polytheism would have the edge over pantheism or atheism.

These two principles lead to an objective definition of what it means to be normal and explain why atheism is so unsuccessful at transferring from one generation to the next, compared to religion - based value systems.

Radhakrishnan says, that secularism is based, not on irreligion or atheism, but on «the universality of spiritual values which may be attained by a variety of ways».

Perusing the index of Origins, the weekly publication of representative documents and speeches compiled by Catholic News Service, our imaginary historian will note, for example, the following initiatives undertaken at the national, diocesan and parish levels in 1994 - 95: providing alternatives to abortion; staffing adoption agencies; conducting adult education courses; addressing African American Catholics» pastoral needs; funding programs to prevent alcohol abuse; implementing a new policy on altar servers and guidelines for the Anointing of the Sick; lobbying for arms control; eliminating asbestos in public housing; supporting the activities of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities (227 strong); challenging atheism in American society; establishing base communities (also known as small faith communities); providing aid to war victims in Bosnia; conducting Catholic research in bioethics; publicizing the new Catechism of the Catholic Church; battling child abuse; strengthening the relationship between church and labor unions; and deepening the structures and expressions of collegiality in the local and diocesan church.

State atheism in the Soviet Union was known as gosateizm, [1] and was based on the ideology of Marxism — Leninism.

Considering that there are five great religions besides atheism, if you adopt the theory of creationism based on the Bible then should you not be teaching the beliefs of other four religions atleast, leaving aside the beliefs of the atheists?

The Young Atheist's Handbook was written by science teacher Alom Shaha and tells the story of his upbringing in a Bangladeshi Muslim community in South East London, how he overcame his inner conflict surrounding his atheism, and the lessons he learnt in leading a good life, full of awe and wonder, based on humanist principles.

I grew up the other side of that Iron Curtain, where the state religion was atheism (dialectic materialism), which «scientific» basis of the Marxism and Leninism ultimately lead to the inevitable victory of the proletariat's revolution.

It must be admitted (based upon the evidence) that most scientists are atheist and / or agnostic (with «weak atheism» being an extension of agnosticism):

Atheism is the primary focus, because, among other things, it represents the ultimate rejection of the demands of religious teachings and moral traditions, most of which are based on a quasi-governmental purpose that includes control of the population.