The debate "Marriage is a religious practice therefore atheist couple shouldn't get married" was started by
October 11, 2017, 10:13 am.
5 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 25 people are on the disagree side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Ben23 posted 10 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 15 arguments, Ben23 posted 3 arguments to the disagreers part.
Ben23, YoungVoicesof_Tomorrow and 3 visitors agree.
Nemiroff, historybuff, kill_all_idiots, FrankFlank, DrakeVonSchweetz, lito, binoykrtudu, AyYildiz05, fishermo20, Masonearl, kissmyashleeyy and 14 visitors disagree.
why can't a person adapt an interesting custom from another people? That is stupid to restrict!
heck, Christians shouldn't marry either! it's a ritual that was created in worship of numerous imperfect pagan gods. heck they shouldn't even celebrate Christmas which is originally pagan saturnalia!
why are you using rituals of pagan heathens? isn't that sacrilege?
I'm not saying you shouldn't practice these heathen rituals (Like marriage), don't want you twisting my words. I'm just trying to show how absurd your original point is.
congratulations, you did a proper quote. now if only you would also not ignore any inconvenient points around the quote we could have a coherent debate.
why exactly can't atheists swear love for one another and proclaim an oath?
if the harvest was always originally a religious festival, does that mean atheists cannot farm?
"it can't be helped that most customs are built on beliefs of ancients who had no answers except for an all powerful daddy who made everything for them? it's not like the religions even agree on anything anyway." PASTE!
if non Greeks can practice a Greek invention, non theists can practice a theistic invention.
one can swear love to another without involving a diety. faith in God has about as much to do with marriage as Greeks do with democracy. origin and nothing else.
i literally did a copy and paste. if anyone wants they can scroll down.
but I agree. this is like talking to a wall. if this is how it will be, good day.
The replied to will link to my original statement which was quoted for reference.
??????, we're done here. Its one thing correct a statement it's another to deny it, denying it is disingenuous and hypocritical.
Therefore there's no need to further this discussion if you're committed to win an argument even if you have to lie.
Plus, your point on democracy has nothing to do with the argument. peace ?
can you point to a prominent atheist leader, writer, or thinker that actually says that besides your anecdotal proof...
Cause you have 1 atheists telling you "no, and I have no idea what your talking about" right here. (it's me). also no one else I know thinks that either. your either making that up, sourcing some extremist news source, or listening to trolls who are probably just busting your chops.
majority which "you judge upon"?
Not sure what that means. are you christian? Because I'm quite sure there's a "judge not lest ye be judged" line somewhere in their teachings.
"do I not research". research what? we just got to this tangent. tell me, which atheists groups seek to actively abolish religion save the most extreme communists half a century ago? as far as I can see, the only people seeking to abolish religions are .... people of other religions...
or are you going to talk about the persecution of religion here in the US because we won't codify your biblical law into national law.
my statement was:
"it's a human custom, most of them just happened to be religious and injected god into everything."
which I clarified to be:
"it's a human custom. most of the *humans* happened to be religious so they injected religion into *all of their customs*."
at no point was any of:
" it can't be helped that most customs are built... etc"
anywhere in my statement.
still ignoring my comparison of non Greeks practicing democracy and the question of whether atheists can yeild harvest as almost all harvests were deeply rooted in religious beliefs and customs.
"they hate some religious people" is fallacious argument. Ask a genuine atheist if they hate religion, the answer is most often yes. Believe me, I've spoken to more or less than a hundred atheist and I haven't got one No from non of them. They all hate religion and I quote the majority of those who I spoke to " religion is the reason for everything bad that exist today". Do your research.
Again, I didn't twist anything. I quote " it can't be helped that most customs are built... etc" Its clear, for someone reason now you refuse to acknowledge what your meaning.
The majority which I judge upon hate the idea of religion. All atheistic movements have no more religion as their purpose for the movement. Do your research?
My feelings towards unicorns are irrelevant but if you really want an answer it's I love them. I think their awsome!
why hate what you don't believe in? That makes no sense.
atheists dont hate religion. they hate some religious people, particularly those who push their beliefs on others. as a whole, atheists dont really care where and when you gather, and what you do there... unless it's planning violence.
they also don't care what you say at your bedside or the dinner table. as confused as you are about me questioning your feelings towards a unicorn. I am confused as to your assertions of religion hating atheists.
you didn't summarize what I said. you took a single sentence of mine and twisted it into a similar single sentence with a vastly different meaning.
I stated it is a social custom which had religion injected into it. you twisted it into me saying it's a religious custom to match your intended point.
aside from that singular sentence, you ignored my comparison to why non Greeks use democracy, the general progression of culture and the ignorance of our ancestors to alternate natural explanations.
it's not a summary if you go from 1 sentence to 1 sentence.
it's not a summary if you leave out a majority of points.
And it's not a summary if you misrepresent the point.
on second reading, maybe it was my fault.
"it's a human custom. most of the *humans* happened to be religious so they injected religion into *all of their customs*.
eating, fasting, the harvest, were all religious events. should atheists not harvest?
I assume hatred because I'm generalizing atheism. Atheist reject the concept of God therefore rejecting religion. Its hypocritical to accept certain practices when rejecting the fundamental concept whereby these practices emerged.
I did not twist your words, I just summarized what you said. You should never try to win a debate, you should always try to make a point across.
And I can't see how my feelings for unicorns is relevant?
you twist a few of my words and ignore the rest. is that your method of debate?
And now you assume hatred. is the dichotomy for belief acceptance or hate? Do you hate unicorns?
That marriage is a religious doctrine adopted by society. My point was if atheist or even non-atheist people who hate religion in general shouldn't accept anything that's related to religion.
And what exactly am I agreeing to?
please quote my statement because I'm not quite sure.
Thank you for agreeing.
democracy is a greek concept.
Does that mean non Greeks shouldn't use it? Or convert to Greekism in order to be democratic?
all knowledge and society is built on the ideas of the past. it can't be helped that most customs are built on beliefs of ancients who had no answers except for an all powerful daddy who made everything for them? it's not like the religions even agree on anything anyway.
it's a human custom, most of them just happened to be religious and injected god into everything.
just because a concept originated in a religion doesn't mean it must be only religious. fasting was a religious concept, as was self mutilation.
what isn't a religious concept is science, which was often banned by the church and other religious authorities. so if you feel atheists can't marry, you must agree theists must live like Amish and never see a doctor or take medicine.
marriage is a social concept that has changed in many ways and is nothing like it's original state.
Its called religious laws.
Marriage is a religious concept, and religion was politics in those times .
so if atheists seek the approval of the state as their authority... What the big deal? also marriage is a key aspect of many laws, including tax laws, inheritance, and even hospital visitation rights.
marriage as practiced throughout most of Christianity (sorry for assuming if you are not christian) had little to do with the choice of the bethrowed. marriage was a political and economic tool that had little to do with faith or love. it was often forced.
marriage is simply a vow between 2 people that they will care for each other through their lives. god is an optional part of it.
And unity of a marriage is declared by supreme authority so either by state or by God ots still a worship. because of the acknowledgment of high authority
it's not a restriction, it's the truth. if atheist really hate religion but still want to practice certain things that's link to religion is disingenuous.
Marriage originated from religion and history speaks. All ancient civilizations had a religion
Also, there is nothing that says only religious people can fast or drink wine. this restriction is silly.
even your grouping of people based on a lack of belief is silly. it's like holding a club for people who don't play poker... well we know what they won't be doing in the club, but what exactly are they going to be doing?
you can't define people based on a negative quality.
marriage is not a religious practice. it is a nearly universal feature of all human cultures.