Thom Hartmann - Is a government sanctioned Day of Reason proof that atheism can be a religion?

Run time: 09:24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofpHebGIScA   Posted on YouTube: May 07, 2010 By YouTube Member: thomhartmann Views on YouTube: 14   Posted on DU: May 07, 2010 By DU Member: thomhartmann Views on DU: 1005

 
The Thom Hartmann Program can be heard daily M-F 12-3pm ET. Visit www.thomhartmann.com to listen live, join the community or purchase a podcast.

evangelical atheists? there`s a few here that fit that description....

Lack of belief in something is not a religion.

What atheists are arguing against is imposition of religion on OTHERS. Can't understand that, huh? I'm not surprised.

If it's government-sanctioned, promoted, or funded, even the most generic, non-sectarian day of prayer imposes religion on everyone. That's un-American.

A day when everyone accepts facts as reality and doesn't at least knowingly violate the rules of logic. To conflate that with the worshiping of a sky being is utter nonsense. I find it just as repugnant that Hartman can't tell the difference between atheism and religion as the fact that every session of the US Congress starts with a prayer, giving he impression that decisions that affect life and death and the direction of humanity are being made by superstitious people who believe that they need to talk to their imaginary friend before tending to serious business. It gives an air of legitimacy to batshit crazy ideas like denying evolution in textbooks.

Lack of belief is NOT A RELIGION! No matter how bad religious people want it to be so they can pin this crap on atheists.

there are more than a few, actually.

I am an atheist myself, but I don't go out of my way to push that on anybody nor do I consider myself better than anyone else who might not agree with me.

There are quite a few self described atheists here who I have described as evangelical atheists. They are as boorish as evangelical Christians.

After all, religious people are all atheists with regard to every religion but their own. A Buddhist is an atheist in regard to Christianity. A Christian is an atheist in regard to Paganism, etc.

Thom Hartmann is usually such a clear thinker, but he's wrong here. This just shows how incredibly powerful brainwashing can be, particularly if parents do it to their children from birth.

I agree. I enjoy and learn so much from his show, but whenever he talks about atheism I change the channel.

He compares atheists with religious right wing extremism as the opposite end of the spectrum. Thing is, I don't see the killing of abortion doctors, or suicide bombings or religious wars being committed by atheists.

One of the major gripes atheists have with religion is that they say religious folk push (or force) their views onto others. Well how is that any different from say, Bill Maher who uses every opportunity he gets to attack religion? Calling people every type of stupid who believe in a God. Is that not pushing your views onto someone as well? Vitriolic attacks are vitriolic attacks no matter who is saying it.

Now I wait for all of DU to descend on this comment and call me a Right-winger for saying something in defense of religion (regardless of the fact that I haven't been to a church in YEARS).

i have`t lost my belief in christ`s message. i have no problem with people who do`t believe but i take issue with those who attack me because i believe in christ`s message.

I was sunned that A) Thom doesn't know that and B) the caller apparently didn't know it either. Thom said you can't prove gravity exists. True, but you can make very accurate predictions using Newton's concept of gravity, which is impossible if you have no rational understanding of gravity.

For instance a military engineer in a 17th century military could calculate the exact trajectory of a canon ball thanks to http://users.whsmithnet.co.uk/paulbird/gravbook/#thebasics">Newton's laws of motion, and therefore he could place the batteries at the right spot during siege.

Prior to that this problem was unsolvable and a matter of guesswork because Aristotle thought arrows fly on a parabolic trajectory since their essence is earth and they are trying to reunite with earth. A plausible sounding theory, except no one can make verifiable predictions based upon it.

I don't see why he keeps harping on this, there is way more important issues he should be addressing instead of some label that has been so blurred no longer is it valid.