Now are no "official" rules to atheism, but since some people feel the need to portray atheism as a "religion", I would offer these ten suggestions for rational, progressive, non-religious people to follow.

Hypothetically, if you had to live in a world revolving around humanity following a set of "rules", which ten would you rather see people adhering to?

1. Atheist
Try to Treat others as you would want to have them treat you.
1. Religionist/Superstitionist
I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.

2. Atheist
Be Truthful and honest even if inconvenient or uncomfortable.
2. Religionist/Superstitionist
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

3. Atheist
Treat the environment and all life with reverence ensuring it's improvement by virtue of preventing loss, injury or any other harmful change.
3. Religionist/Superstitionist
Remember thou keep the Sabbath Day.

4. Atheist
Determine what is moral in your own mind, not what others dictate morality should be.
4. Religionist/Superstitionist
Honor thy Father and thy Mother.

5. Atheist
Never feel absolutely certain of anything and question everything, be they bibles, history or science books.
5. Religionist/Superstitionist
Thou shalt not kill.

6. Atheist
Never discourage expression of free thought, regardless of the subject matter or personal opinion.
6. Religionist/Superstitionist
Thou shalt not commit adultery.

7. Atheist
Aggressively prohibit oppressive authority in defense that all people are born free and equal in dignity and rights without distinction of any kind.
7. Religionist/Superstitionist
Thou shalt not steal.

8. Atheist
Do not fear to be in the minority, for the majority is not always one that rules without prejudice.
8. Religionist/Superstitionist
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

9. Atheist
Show concern fo the welfare of others, help those that are less fortunate than yourself.
9. Religionist/Superstitionist
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife.

10. Atheist
Enjoy yourself and others, always living your life to the fullest.
10. Religionist/Superstitionist
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods.

paraphrased from ---------- http://throwawayyourtv.com/2007/02/atheist-10-commandments.html

The Gospel According to Freethinker! Amen! :thumbs:

Try to Treat others as you would want to have them treat you.
Isn't that in the Bible too?

Be Truthful and honest even if inconvenient or uncomfortable.
That can't be defined as an atheist trait. What if honest inquiry leads to theism?

Treat the environment and all life with reverence ensuring it's improvement by virtue of preventing loss, injury or any other harmful change.
Again, not exclusively atheistic.

Determine what is moral in your own mind, not what others dictate morality should be.
But I value peer feedback and opinion.

Never feel absolutely certain of anything and question everything, be they bibles, history or science books.
Or atheist commandment threads.

Never discourage expression of free thought, regardless of the subject matter or personal opinion.
As a moderator of an atheist forum I support that. Fundy mantra-spouting athiests are a real hindrance to true free thought.

Aggressively prohibit oppressive authority in defense that all people are born free and equal in dignity and rights without distinction of any kind.
Again, not exclusively atheist.

Do not fear to be in the minority, for the majority is not always one that rules without prejudice.
I can't even imagine what you think is atheistic about that.

Show concern fo the welfare of others, help those that are less fortunate than yourself.
Lesson for you there, Christian Aid.

Enjoy yourself and others, always living your life to the fullest.
Well I'll go with that one at least. ;)

.


Determine what is moral in your own mind, not what others dictate morality should be.
]

Others have thought this.


From a taped interview:

"... then I learned that all moral judgments are "value judgments," that all value
judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either "right" or "wrong."
I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the
American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments.


Believe it or not, I figured out what apparently the Chief Justice couldn't
figure out for himself -- that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero,
multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any
"reason" to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring --
the strength of character -- to throw off its shackles....


... I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become
truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom,
the greatest block and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable "value judgment"
that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these
"others"? Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a
human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more to
you than a hog's life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more
for the one than the other? Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific
enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as "moral" or
"good" and others as "immoral" or "bad"?


In any case, let me assure you, my dear young lady, that there is absolutely no
comparison between the pleasure I might take in eating ham and the pleasure I
anticipatein raping and murdering you. That is the honest conclusion to which my
education has led me -- after the most conscientious examination of my spontaneous and
uninhibited self."


Ted Bundy

Very good comparison to the ten commandments, though they aren't attached to atheists. I agree with and follow most of them, but that's because those are values that I hold, not because I am an atheist.

Very cool. I am reading and thinking and reading and well good job.
lol
Better then what I was thinking of really saying. I can't spell that many bad words in one sitting.

Cool thread Freethinker!




The ten commandments of atheism...

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion/atheism/10CommandmentsTabletofEthicalAtheis.jpg

Ted Bundy
Yes, pick out the most insane members of society in order to paint a good idea as something bad!

George Washington was responsible for the deaths of many during the American Revolution, therefore the revolution was a bad idea. Yay!

Evak, I'm sure you're aware of the need for simple and basic criteria concerning morality.

IE, laws against murder, stealing, the protection of young ones.

Without laws, there is anarchy.

PS.

Washington and Bundy have zero in common. Still, can't help but think how cool Ted would have looked in a Continental uniform......he really would have reeled the victims in with that.

Washington and Bundy have zero in common.
They're both male white humans, famous around the globe, and killed people. Your statement just got owned!

LOL, who exactly did Washington murder with malice aforethought?

I'll concede that he punished deserters harshly--accepted behavior during wartime. This isn't classified as murder.

No WONDER that EEE-vile teacher got in trouble for having a picture of the depraved, bewigged, toothless degenerate in his classroom.

Hang the swine!!!!!!

He said kill, not murder.

Correct---Washington "killed" (and I could be wrong but I don't think he actually fired at anyone during the Revolution), Bundy murdered.

A critical difference.

My argument is this--Bundy decided, in his own mind, that it was moral for him to smash young women over the head with a crowbar, rape and torture them repeatedly, then slowly strangle them to death.

Then he'd cut their heads off and carry the heads around in the trunk of his car ----or, for a nice decorative touch, place the heads on his mantlepiece..... this after he'd wash the head's hair and put lipstick, rouge, and mascara on the faces.

Or, he'd occassionally strangle and leave bodies in a pigsty, face down.
Or, just leave the remains dumped in a canyon.

In his own mind, this was moral because he said so.

Bundy was not insane. Not a single one of the battery of psychologists who examined him said this was so. His thought processes were normal; he understood the difference between right and wrong.

And this could very well be the most ridiculous debate ever on these threads.



There are approximately 150 plus serial killers operating at this time in the US.... conservative estimate.
I'm not counting the other criminals such as the mass murderers, spree killers, or those who commit felony murder. Or the thieves, rapists, or pedophiles.

But hey, let's have each of them decide what is moral and what is not.

But hey, let's have each of them decide what is moral and what is not.
My point is that this is the stupidest argument imaginable for this debate that doesn't involve unicorns and satyrs throwing a party with corn cob holders and radios.

You do not use the dregs of society--serial killers, pedophiles, murderers, rapists, etc--to disown the entire idea. Obviously the idea that each man should judge what is moral in their own mind is not a statement that justifies murder.

The questions are less serious in nature. They are mundane and deal with the whole of society:
Is drinking to excess a sin? How about drinking?
Should I have sex before I get married?
Shall I make an effort to not litter?
Cheating a test, is that okay in school?
Lying to a co-worker, be it trivial or of importance, is that okay?

When murder is something we instinctually repelled from doing, you don't use murderers to say that people shouldn't judge what is right and wrong in their own mind. Churches, parents, and societies have bestowed backwards moral systems for trivial things for millenia.

Murdering someone will always be something to be frowned upon unless humanity evolves into something non-human. The idea that people shouldn't control their own judgments on what they do with their life in the way of lifestyles, etc., is abhorrent to me. Morality is subjective, first and foremost.

My point is that this is the stupidest argument imaginable




No more stupid than comparing Bundy et al to Washington.

You do not use the dregs of society--serial killers, pedophiles, murderers, rapists, etc--to disown the entire idea.


They make up a sizable portion of our society...... and that is the argument that they use for their defense--it was "right" in their own mind.

Churches, parents, and societies have bestowed backwards moral systems for trivial things for millenia.



What do you classify as backwards?

The idea that people shouldn't control their own judgments on what they do with their life in the way of lifestyles, etc., is abhorrent to me. Morality is subjective, first and foremost.

You do understand that many are unable to control their own judgements?

Try to Treat others as you would want to have them treat you.

Isn't that in the Bible too?

Yes. But so what? It doesn't mean it cannot be something non-religious people should strive toward.

Be Truthful and honest even if inconvenient or uncomfortable.

That can't be defined as an atheist trait.

No one has made any suggestion whatsoever that it should be defined as a strictly "atheist trait", Einstein.

Treat the environment and all life with reverence ensuring it's improvement by virtue of preventing loss, injury or any other harmful change.

Again, not exclusively atheistic.

?!?!?

No one said it was.

Determine what is moral in your own mind, not what others dictate morality should be.

But I value peer feedback and opinion.

So? Do what you will. No one is mandating that you follow all the suggestions. That is why they are referred to as suggestions, and not commandments.

Never feel absolutely certain of anything and question everything, be they bibles, history or science books.

Or atheist commandment threads.

:rolleyes: There are no atheist commandment threads on these boards that I am aware of.

Never discourage expression of free thought, regardless of the subject matter or personal opinion.

As a moderator of an atheist forum I support that. Fundy mantra-spouting athiests are a real hindrance to true free thought.

Firstly, it is no "manta. Secondly, there is nothing "fundamentalist" inherent in posting a list of suggestions.

Read the title of the thread.

It says -- S_U_G_G_E_S_T_I_O_N_S.

Aggressively prohibit oppressive authority in defense that all people are born free and equal in dignity and rights without distinction of any kind.


Again, not exclusively atheist.

Again, there has not been the slightest suggestion made that is IS exclusively atheist.

I cannot determine if you're actually that stupid, or you're being purposely obtuse. I suspect the former.

Do not fear to be in the minority, for the majority is not always one that rules without prejudice.

I can't even imagine what you think is atheistic about that.

I believe you.

Show concern for the welfare of others, help those that are less fortunate than yourself.

Lesson for you there, Christian Aid.

Simply because it is suggested that it might be worthwhile for atheists to help those that are less fortunate does not mean that the assertion is being made that religionists never help anyone.

You exhibit an extremely binary mindset.

If someone says --"I like black cars", it does not automatically follow that the person making said statement hates all white cars.

Enjoy yourself and others, always living your life to the fullest.

Well I'll go with that one at least.

Like I give a fuck.

Atheist are not copying the bible. Wiccan and pagans had sets of moral and standards way before the bible.

Like I give a fuck.Sorry, I was in a naughty mood and was indeed being obtuse. Others like your opening post so I take it back.

I didn't. I think attempts to make atheism more palatable to Christians (c'mon, let's not bullshit around here) by taking steps in their direction is patronizing and amounts to self-hate. Ethics and altruism do not go out the window once God is disavowed, and no more is needed than that to justify atheism to Christians concerned about having their precious universal-morality-handed-down-from-the-creator-of-the-world questioned. It's needlessly apologetic. If we scoff at Christian apologetics, why should we put up with their atheist brethren?

I didn't. I think attempts to make atheism more palatable to Christians (c'mon, let's not bullshit around here) by taking steps in their direction is patronizing and amounts to self-hate.And plain bewildering, AFAIAC. Like appealing to a klansman with "hey, I have prejudices too!"

What do you classify as backwards?
Perhaps if you were raised with the "Catholic guilt complex" it'd be easier to explain.

And you're actually wrong on the Ted/George point, if you consult my post you'll see I did not compare Bundy and Washington, you just made a post that begged for me to compare the two in a semi-comical fashion. Washington was used as another example with the same jump in logic.

And no, serial killers do not make up a sizable portion of the populace. They are murderers that go against biological inhibitions and kill their same species--they're not well in their state of mind.

Using your logic here:
Let's say you give out free lunches to the homeless of Chicago. The homeless are all free to choose from 3 options, eat it when and where they want and mostly seem grateful due to the gift and the choices. One of the homeless men decides to chuck his lunch at at moving vehicle to cause mayhem, and because of this rash misbehavior, you now will not give out lunches to the homeless. Rather silly, if it wasn't sad.

You do understand that many are unable to control their own judgements?
Yes, we're all automatons that are driven to do the most terrible thing possible. Let's legislate morality and use repressive societal normalcies to crush the liberties of people.

Do not misquote me. At no time did I say serial killers make up a sizable portion of society.

I lumped them in with all other classes of criminals as it should be when you take them as a whole.

2. You say it's backwards to be taught morals by parents, churches, or society--or perhaps I am misquoting YOU.

If you are indeed a moral person,then who taught you to be?

Atheist are not copying the bible. Wiccan and pagans had sets of moral and standards way before the bible.
human sacrifice hardly fits in with modern morals and standards.

human sacrifice hardly fits in with modern morals and standards.

I know.

Yet millions of people in this country --some 80% of the populace-- who are blind to the inconsistency of it still adhere to BibleGawd and the Bible, which condones human sacrifice.

Odd, isn't it.

Cool thread Freethinker!




The ten commandments of atheism...

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b222/godsandmen/religion/atheism/10CommandmentsTabletofEthicalAtheis.jpg


Ahh...I liked his better.

Very good comparison to the ten commandments,
The ten commandments are not tied directly towards christians either.

The ten commandments are not tied directly towards christians either.What do you mean, jere? Sounds possibly like you have an OT / NT issue in mind.

Perhaps if you were raised with the "Catholic guilt complex" it'd be easier to explain.

And you're actually wrong on the Ted/George point, if you consult my post you'll see I did not compare Bundy and Washington, you just made a post that begged for me to compare the two in a semi-comical fashion. Washington was used as another example with the same jump in logic.

I don't understand this logic you speak of?
See bundys' quote again and how he states he is free now to act as he wants.
for the love of god what does this have to do with George Washington?
enlighten me.

And no, serial killers do not make up a sizable portion of the populace. They are murderers that go against biological inhibitions and kill their same species--they're not well in their state of mind.


Aboslute crap. Not well, my ass. Find me a study indicating so. Read Dr Samenow. They CHOOSE to be crooks. They CHOOSE to disregard the laws of society.
no one is COMPELLED to be a crook.

Using your logic here:
Let's say you give out free lunches to the homeless of Chicago. The homeless are all free to choose from 3 options, eat it when and where they want and mostly seem grateful due to the gift and the choices. One of the homeless men decides to chuck his lunch at at moving vehicle to cause mayhem, and because of this rash misbehavior, you now will not give out lunches to the homeless. Rather silly, if it wasn't sad.


Silly because it has zero to do with this thread.


Yes, we're all automatons that are driven to do the most terrible thing possible. Let's legislate morality and use repressive societal normalcies to crush the liberties of people.



Psuedo-Marxist slopola.
**************************************88

What do you mean, jere? Sounds possibly like you have an OT / NT issue in mind.


Something of one - yes. I have attended a couple of churches and know a few friends whose religious beliefs see the entire old testament as outdated and that the New Testament is the only doctrine of faith. They still use many of the "commandments" as guidelines - but don't see them as the definitive laws of their religion. In fact, most churches (although they don't publically admit it - or even think about it) use the words in Red as the definitive law of God.

That said - most of the laws in the commandments are rather simple things to live by. Excluding the laws about worshiping God and idolatry and the like - they are common sense. Do not kill, do not steal, et cetera.

If you are indeed a moral person,then who taught you to be?
Well I guess I'm a pseudo-Marxist so I must not be moral.

Since I disagree with the morals of my parents, the church, and society, I clearly don't learn to be a "moral" person from them.

I know.

Yet millions of people in this country --some 80% of the populace-- who are blind to the inconsistency of it still adhere to BibleGawd and the Bible, which condones human sacrifice.

Odd, isn't it.
odd that you think it is...Abraham was being tested by God..He never expected or wanted him to go thru with it:rolleyes:

human sacrifice hardly fits in with modern morals and standards.
That is slander of a religion. We do not sacrifice humans and might I mention god asked on of his followers to sacrifice his son to him and in the old testiment is was common to sacrifice live animals to god.

Pagans are no different.

Pagans did not sacrifice humans for anything. That is a made up concept by christian to defomate the pagan religion. It is absolutly not true.

odd that you think it is...Abraham was being tested by God..He never expected or wanted him to go thru with it:rolleyes:
That wasn't the point the fact that god commanded to see if he was faithful which I find odd since god knows all and would know the outcome of the sitaution anyways. I mean if god can see through your heart there is no need for such a rediculous test.