Are atheists as less-evolved species than the spiritual humans?

[BreezeWood]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

.

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

... having little mental or spiritual awareness

one might wonder, where do the zombie religious mental nutcases come from ...

 

[Unification]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

Wait wait wait....

Let me get this straight....

You think atheists are a different species from.religious folks?

Essentially, yes. My argument is that "human" rights apply only to humans who demonstrate a degree of enlightenment, I do not care about the specific religion in that regard.

While materialistic atheists and more inclined to simple pleasures such as porn addictions, drug addictions, and unhealthy diets - as opposed to higher pleasures such as arts, musics, and spirituality - are acting akin to a lower species, such as a chimpanzee or a cow, rather than a human.

So essentially, the concept of "all men being created equal" applies only to the spiritual, not to the materialistic, who are a lesser form of human deserving of lesser rights unless they mature and change their worldview.

Much as how if one is physically "adult" but mentally handicapped with a child's IQ, they are legally considered a child - if one is spiritually unenlightened on the same level of a dog or a cow, I argue they should be not considered of the same varna.

Lol, I take it back. That's definitely religious school brainwashing.

I do not care for arguments about American "religious" schools or whatnot - that does not concern my view on religion.

My argument is otherwise, that American public schools should be "religious" schools, and that so long as no single monotheistic faith is prefered, but people have a choice - then the government is justified in establishing and funding religion.

 

[BlackFlag]

Yes, I am a beast.

My argument is if one is a committed atheist, they have no reason to oppose rape or anything which any other animal does - an atheist may not choose to rape or murder himself, but he can't morally oppose it on any consistent grounds.

So one cannot consistently be an atheist and embrace humanistic values such as "rights" - if they identify as atheist they demote themselves to status of "animal".

If you need the threat of magical punishment to resist the urge to go around raping people, then you’re probably a less evolved creature.

My argument is that non-enlightened do need to fear divine punishment since they aren't evolved beyond the materialistic mode of thinking

While enlightened people do not, since they do out of genuine understanding.

Whih reigion did you pick? Plenty have allowed rape. How dare you judge them

If they allowed rape, then they were merely materialistic atheism dressed up in religious veneer.

To say a religion allowed rape, would be akin to saying that a vegan allows the eating of meat, which is an oxymoron.

Lol are you a God? If not, you have no standard by which to judge any religion as you are just a human with no evidence for any higher law existing, or any evidence of what any higher law would be.

 

[Unification]

My argument is if one is a committed atheist, they have no reason to oppose rape or anything which any other animal does - an atheist may not choose to rape or murder himself, but he can't morally oppose it on any consistent grounds.

So one cannot consistently be an atheist and embrace humanistic values such as "rights" - if they identify as atheist they demote themselves to status of "animal".

If you need the threat of magical punishment to resist the urge to go around raping people, then you’re probably a less evolved creature.

My argument is that non-enlightened do need to fear divine punishment since they aren't evolved beyond the materialistic mode of thinking

While enlightened people do not, since they do out of genuine understanding.

Whih reigion did you pick? Plenty have allowed rape. How dare you judge them

If they allowed rape, then they were merely materialistic atheism dressed up in religious veneer.

To say a religion allowed rape, would be akin to saying that a vegan allows the eating of meat, which is an oxymoron.

Lol are you a God? If not, you have no standard by which to judge any religion as you are just a human with no evidence for any higher law existing, or any evidence of what any higher law would be.

I digress, the evidence is clear to the point that no scholar of honest persuasion denies it.

The only "debate" is what religion or the specifics thereof should be the one to represent truth, but there is no honest debate that there is one God or higher reality, anyone denying this is either ignorant or perverted (e.x. wants to rape or commit sexual deviance such as the atheist "scholar" Marquis de Sade and attempts to deny the reality of their actions to justify it.)

 

[Crepitus]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

Wait wait wait....

Let me get this straight....

You think atheists are a different species from.religious folks?

Essentially, yes. My argument is that "human" rights apply only to humans who demonstrate a degree of enlightenment, I do not care about the specific religion in that regard.

While materialistic atheists and more inclined to simple pleasures such as porn addictions, drug addictions, and unhealthy diets - as opposed to higher pleasures such as arts, musics, and spirituality - are acting akin to a lower species, such as a chimpanzee or a cow, rather than a human.

So essentially, the concept of "all men being created equal" applies only to the spiritual, not to the materialistic, who are a lesser form of human deserving of lesser rights unless they mature and change their worldview.

Much as how if one is physically "adult" but mentally handicapped with a child's IQ, they are legally considered a child - if one is spiritually unenlightened on the same level of a dog or a cow, I argue they should be not considered of the same varna.

Lol, I take it back. That's definitely religious school brainwashing.

I do not care for arguments about American "religious" schools or whatnot - that does not concern my view on religion.

My argument is otherwise, that American public schools should be "religious" schools, and that so long as no single monotheistic faith is prefered, but people have a choice - then the government is justified in establishing and funding religion.

Next question for you homeschoolers:

If you think some humans are more evolved than others does that mean you admit evolution is real?

And as far as public schools being religious, why do you hate the Constitution and the founding fathers?

 

[Unification]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

Wait wait wait....

Let me get this straight....

You think atheists are a different species from.religious folks?

Essentially, yes. My argument is that "human" rights apply only to humans who demonstrate a degree of enlightenment, I do not care about the specific religion in that regard.

While materialistic atheists and more inclined to simple pleasures such as porn addictions, drug addictions, and unhealthy diets - as opposed to higher pleasures such as arts, musics, and spirituality - are acting akin to a lower species, such as a chimpanzee or a cow, rather than a human.

So essentially, the concept of "all men being created equal" applies only to the spiritual, not to the materialistic, who are a lesser form of human deserving of lesser rights unless they mature and change their worldview.

Much as how if one is physically "adult" but mentally handicapped with a child's IQ, they are legally considered a child - if one is spiritually unenlightened on the same level of a dog or a cow, I argue they should be not considered of the same varna.

Lol, I take it back. That's definitely religious school brainwashing.

I do not care for arguments about American "religious" schools or whatnot - that does not concern my view on religion.

My argument is otherwise, that American public schools should be "religious" schools, and that so long as no single monotheistic faith is prefered, but people have a choice - then the government is justified in establishing and funding religion.

Next question for you homeschoolers:

If you think some humans are more evolved than others does that mean you admit evolution is real?

Evolution is a religious concept which all monotheistic faiths understood since times ancient, such as many ancient Greeck philosophers who pre-dated Darwin.

Evolution is essentially a form of natural creationism, or the growing of things into increasing complexity, much as how humans in the image of God create and evolve technologies from similar forms (such as computers which evolved from calculators)

In modern times it's been appropriated by unenlightened atheists who shouldn't be allowed in science to begin with, since only spiritual people are truly capable of understanding science or any higher aspect of the cosmos.

(Ideally the sciences would actively remove and prohibit any atheistic interpretations from their ranks as heresies, and re-establish science as an institution existing solely for the purpose of understanding God or the cosmos as it was in earlier ares, such as the days of the Roman Catholic Church's dominance)

And as far as public schools being religious, why do you hate the Constitution and the founding fathers?

The American constitution is a dated document, and many of the American founders' views were not correct. I do not consider it sacred.

The founders, apparently, believed that individuals who embrace materialistic atheism were capable of governing themselves and appreciating "rights" - my argument, is that this is not so in most cases that are seen, since if left to their own devices, people who worship materialism merely demand selfish "rights" but contribute nothing of value to society -

which is proven by the degenerative lifestyles embraced by modern americans, such as morbid rates of obesity, binge television watching, and other slavish addictions - if people refuse to govern themselves morally and productively, then they invite the state to impose religion on them for the greater social good, that is my argument

 

[Crepitus]

Wait wait wait....

Let me get this straight....

You think atheists are a different species from.religious folks?

Essentially, yes. My argument is that "human" rights apply only to humans who demonstrate a degree of enlightenment, I do not care about the specific religion in that regard.

While materialistic atheists and more inclined to simple pleasures such as porn addictions, drug addictions, and unhealthy diets - as opposed to higher pleasures such as arts, musics, and spirituality - are acting akin to a lower species, such as a chimpanzee or a cow, rather than a human.

So essentially, the concept of "all men being created equal" applies only to the spiritual, not to the materialistic, who are a lesser form of human deserving of lesser rights unless they mature and change their worldview.

Much as how if one is physically "adult" but mentally handicapped with a child's IQ, they are legally considered a child - if one is spiritually unenlightened on the same level of a dog or a cow, I argue they should be not considered of the same varna.

Lol, I take it back. That's definitely religious school brainwashing.

I do not care for arguments about American "religious" schools or whatnot - that does not concern my view on religion.

My argument is otherwise, that American public schools should be "religious" schools, and that so long as no single monotheistic faith is prefered, but people have a choice - then the government is justified in establishing and funding religion.

Next question for you homeschoolers:

If you think some humans are more evolved than others does that mean you admit evolution is real?

Evolution is a religious concept which all monotheistic faiths understood since times ancient, such as many ancient Greeck philosophers who pre-dated Darwin.

Evolution is essentially a form of natural creationism, or the growing of things into increasing complexity, much as how humans in the image of God create and evolve technologies from similar forms (such as computers which evolved from calculators)

In modern times it's been appropriated by unenlightened atheists who shouldn't be allowed in science to begin with, since only spiritual people are truly capable of understanding science or any higher aspect of the cosmos.

(Ideally the sciences would actively remove and prohibit any atheistic interpretations from their ranks as heresies, and re-establish science as an institution existing solely for the purpose of understanding God or the cosmos as it was in earlier ares, such as the days of the Roman Catholic Church's dominance)

And as far as public schools being religious, why do you hate the Constitution and the founding fathers?

The American constitution is a dated document, and many of the American founders' views were not correct. I do not consider it sacred.

The founders, apparently, believed that individuals who embrace materialistic atheism were capable of governing themselves and appreciating "rights" - my argument, is that this is not so in most cases that are seen, since if left to their own devices, people who worship materialism merely demand selfish "rights" but contribute nothing of value to society -

which is proven by the degenerative lifestyles embraced by modern americans, such as morbid rates of obesity, binge television watching, and other slavish addictions - if people refuse to govern themselves morally and productively, then they invite the state to impose religion on them for the greater social good, that is my argument

Wait wait wait....

Let me get this straight....

You think atheists are a different species from.religious folks?

Essentially, yes. My argument is that "human" rights apply only to humans who demonstrate a degree of enlightenment, I do not care about the specific religion in that regard.

While materialistic atheists and more inclined to simple pleasures such as porn addictions, drug addictions, and unhealthy diets - as opposed to higher pleasures such as arts, musics, and spirituality - are acting akin to a lower species, such as a chimpanzee or a cow, rather than a human.

So essentially, the concept of "all men being created equal" applies only to the spiritual, not to the materialistic, who are a lesser form of human deserving of lesser rights unless they mature and change their worldview.

Much as how if one is physically "adult" but mentally handicapped with a child's IQ, they are legally considered a child - if one is spiritually unenlightened on the same level of a dog or a cow, I argue they should be not considered of the same varna.

Lol, I take it back. That's definitely religious school brainwashing.

I do not care for arguments about American "religious" schools or whatnot - that does not concern my view on religion.

My argument is otherwise, that American public schools should be "religious" schools, and that so long as no single monotheistic faith is prefered, but people have a choice - then the government is justified in establishing and funding religion.

Next question for you homeschoolers:

If you think some humans are more evolved than others does that mean you admit evolution is real?

Evolution is a religious concept which all monotheistic faiths understood since times ancient, such as many ancient Greeck philosophers who pre-dated Darwin.

Evolution is essentially a form of natural creationism, or the growing of things into increasing complexity, much as how humans in the image of God create and evolve technologies from similar forms (such as computers which evolved from calculators)

In modern times it's been appropriated by unenlightened atheists who shouldn't be allowed in science to begin with, since only spiritual people are truly capable of understanding science or any higher aspect of the cosmos.

(Ideally the sciences would actively remove and prohibit any atheistic interpretations from their ranks as heresies, and re-establish science as an institution existing solely for the purpose of understanding God or the cosmos as it was in earlier ares, such as the days of the Roman Catholic Church's dominance)

And as far as public schools being religious, why do you hate the Constitution and the founding fathers?

The American constitution is a dated document, and many of the American founders' views were not correct. I do not consider it sacred.

The founders, apparently, believed that individuals who embrace materialistic atheism were capable of governing themselves and appreciating "rights" - my argument, is that this is not so in most cases that are seen, since if left to their own devices, people who worship materialism merely demand selfish "rights" but contribute nothing of value to society -

which is proven by the degenerative lifestyles embraced by modern americans, such as morbid rates of obesity, binge television watching, and other slavish addictions - if people refuse to govern themselves morally and productively, then they invite the state to impose religion on them for the greater social good, that is my argument

Lol, co-opting evolution! A new tactic from the religious wack-jobs!

 

[Unification]

Lol, co-opting evolution! A new tactic from the religious wack-jobs!

I prove already that evolution is ancient idea, going back to Greece and before.

The proposal that one type of organism could descend from another type goes back to some of the first pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander and Empedocles. Such proposals survived into Roman times. The pot and philosopher Lucretius followed Empedocles in his masterwork De rerum natura (On the Nature of Things).

Hebrew Bible mentions, for example, creatures originating in increasing complexity, ending with humans in image of God - so no, concepts of evolution are compatible with major world religions, and pre-dated Darwin or modern atheism.

---

And yes, I would argue a person who is spiritual is acting at a higher level of human evolution than a person who is materialistic - much as how an animal such as a dolphin with grey matter and cognitive functions is of a higher evolution than an insect with no cognition, and nothing but simple, primitive impulses and reflexes.

So likewise, a materialistic minded person who embraces cheap hedonism, such as addictions to porn, fast food, and slavishness - is of course less evolved than a higher-minded person who appreciates higher concepts such as art, music, spirituality, and the like.

 

[WinterBorn]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

YOur argument only works if you consider all those who professed to believe and then committed crimes to be liars and that they were actually atheists.

There are countless examples of religious people committing horrific crimes. Many seemed to genuinely repent their crimes. But they committed them nonetheless.

Forced religious belief is worthless.

 

[WinterBorn]

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast"

Yes, I am a beast.

My argument is if one is a committed atheist, they have no reason to oppose rape or anything which any other animal does - an atheist may not choose to rape or murder himself, but he can't morally oppose it on any consistent grounds.

The famous atheist Marquis de Sade, who was a known rapist and murder himself, admitted this in his infamous writings, and by raping and murdering, he was merely practicing atheism more consistently than most so called "atheists" actually do.

So one cannot consistently be an atheist and embrace humanistic values such as "rights" - if they identify as atheist they demote themselves to status of "animal".

If it takes the threat of eternal suffering to prevent you from raping and murdering, there is something wrong with you.

 

[Unification]

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast"

Yes, I am a beast.

My argument is if one is a committed atheist, they have no reason to oppose rape or anything which any other animal does - an atheist may not choose to rape or murder himself, but he can't morally oppose it on any consistent grounds.

The famous atheist Marquis de Sade, who was a known rapist and murder himself, admitted this in his infamous writings, and by raping and murdering, he was merely practicing atheism more consistently than most so called "atheists" actually do.

So one cannot consistently be an atheist and embrace humanistic values such as "rights" - if they identify as atheist they demote themselves to status of "animal".

If it takes the threat of eternal suffering to prevent you from raping and murdering, there is something wrong with you.

I do not believe it is they case with me since I am educated on matters of spirituality, I believe it is in many others, and your argument fails to address that one who is materialistic minded cannot rationally object to those things given that animals may commit the same acts.

Much as how the argument that "homosexuality is found in animals" was used by the pro-LGBT crowd, then a pro-rape crowd could also argue that "rape is found in animals" as justification.

 

[WinterBorn]

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast"

Yes, I am a beast.

My argument is if one is a committed atheist, they have no reason to oppose rape or anything which any other animal does - an atheist may not choose to rape or murder himself, but he can't morally oppose it on any consistent grounds.

The famous atheist Marquis de Sade, who was a known rapist and murder himself, admitted this in his infamous writings, and by raping and murdering, he was merely practicing atheism more consistently than most so called "atheists" actually do.

So one cannot consistently be an atheist and embrace humanistic values such as "rights" - if they identify as atheist they demote themselves to status of "animal".

If it takes the threat of eternal suffering to prevent you from raping and murdering, there is something wrong with you.

I do not believe it is they case with me since I am educated on matters of spirituality, I believe it is in many others, and your argument fails to address that one who is materialistic minded cannot rationally object to those things given that animals may commit the same acts.

Much as how the argument that "homosexuality is found in animals" was used by the pro-LGBT crowd, then a pro-rape crowd could also argue that "rape is found in animals" as justification.

The problem is with your claim that the threat of the wrath of the divine is the only thing stopping people from raping and murdering. That is utter nonsense.

 

[WinterBorn]

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast"

Yes, I am a beast.

My argument is if one is a committed atheist, they have no reason to oppose rape or anything which any other animal does - an atheist may not choose to rape or murder himself, but he can't morally oppose it on any consistent grounds.

The famous atheist Marquis de Sade, who was a known rapist and murder himself, admitted this in his infamous writings, and by raping and murdering, he was merely practicing atheism more consistently than most so called "atheists" actually do.

So one cannot consistently be an atheist and embrace humanistic values such as "rights" - if they identify as atheist they demote themselves to status of "animal".

If it takes the threat of eternal suffering to prevent you from raping and murdering, there is something wrong with you.

I do not believe it is they case with me since I am educated on matters of spirituality, I believe it is in many others, and your argument fails to address that one who is materialistic minded cannot rationally object to those things given that animals may commit the same acts.

Much as how the argument that "homosexuality is found in animals" was used by the pro-LGBT crowd, then a pro-rape crowd could also argue that "rape is found in animals" as justification.

Also, it is not the law or religion that stops people from raping and murdering. It is empathy and compassion that stop most people.

I rape and murder exactly as much as I want to rape and murder. In other words, I do not want to rape or murder. Your claim is that people secretly WANT to rape and murder, but refrain from doing so because of the fear of eternal damnation.

 

[Wyatt earp]

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast"

Yes, I am a beast.

My argument is if one is a committed atheist, they have no reason to oppose rape or anything which any other animal does - an atheist may not choose to rape or murder himself, but he can't morally oppose it on any consistent grounds.

So one cannot consistently be an atheist and embrace humanistic values such as "rights" - if they identify as atheist they demote themselves to status of "animal".

If you need the threat of magical punishment to resist the urge to go around raping people, then you’re probably a less evolved creature.

If you don't believe in a higher power , you got a huge problem on your hands.

.

 

[candycorn]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

No; someone’s beliefs do not mean that they are “less evolved”. One’s beliefs are based on (or should be) their truths. If you think it is hot at the north pole…I can’t tell you you’re wrong. Because that is your truth. It doesn’t make you less evolved.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".[/QUOTE

Atheism is the lack of belief in a supreme being. It does preclude a spiritualistic philosophy. It doe not mean that we believe that there is nothing more to life than flesh, bone and blood. It does not preclude the possibility of life, in some form beyond death. I believe that there is a collective consciousness that connects us all in life and death. Religion and a belief in god is in fact based on primitive superstitions born of fear and ignorance. To be able to let go of that and accept the fact that there are things that we don't and cant know, rather than making up shit to explain the inexplicable, is in fact the definition of evolution.

 

[zaangalewa]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

Are you sure you have a glue about evolution and spirituality?

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

The theory of evolution knows not a low end or a high end. It exists no hierarchy in evolution. Something lives and survives - that's it.

While more-evolved species,

This expression is racial. The real scientific theory of evolution knows nothing about "more-evolved" or "less-evolved". Something fits just simple more or less into the environment. A fish fits for example to a pond - but not to a wood glade where a nightingale lives.

such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities

Do they? A raven is for example able to see an individual difference between human beings.

- those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

You compare now culture with nature. But culture follows not the laws of the biological theory of evolution. Someone might says for example that cars "evolve" - but this is not this what happen. Cars for example follow exclusively only plans of human beings. They are made "teleological" (planful). They follow laws of invention and fashion and not laws of evolution. Same with arts and other forms of realized ideas or thoughts.

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

The main problem of atheists is that they often deny that atheism is a belief. They are often so totally convinced from their form of belief (atheism) so they are not able to imagine that another form of belief could be true too. Convinced atheists are often fanatics, who like to define for everyone a kind of state religion "atheism". That's the only one true and possible religion for them. This extremists (not all atheists are such extremists) often think "freedom of religion" is exclusively only "freedom from religion".


You may see here: Arts was always perfect - since the very first moment it existed.

 

[zaangalewa]

... Evolution is a religious concept which all monotheistic faiths understood since times ancient, such as many ancient Greeck philosophers who pre-dated Darwin. …

Evolution is just simple this what always every farmer was doing. In case of natural evolution nature on its own is the farmer - what's not astonishing, because the farmers got this "secret" from the nature.

 

[night_son]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

The "true" atheist (noun) does not exist.

Atheist (n) Someone who does not believe in god; someone who believes that no deities exist.

atheism (n) (1.) The doctrine or belief that there is no God. (2.) A lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

atheistic (adjective) (1.) Rejecting any belief in gods. (2.) Related to or characterized by or given to atheism.

The self-proclaimed atheists collective discerps itself from the rest of humanity and divides itself again into two subgroups: the fallen believers--who seek support and comfort with their return journey to "the fold"; and the provers--who seek, sometimes at any cost, to disprove God's existence to the world in the coerced instilling and resultant evincing of doubt in the believer, or in the believer's psychological or physical destruction should exhaustion of all other means of success fail.

Atheism is a doctrine. God is truth. Let that sink in for a moment. Philosophy versus Fact.

A consequence of being human is eventual acknowledgement--voluntary or otherwise--of the ultimate truth of our species beginning. While many theories exist, they exist only as hands held in front of wide fearful eyes to hide the fact of Logos born within us as we leave our mother's womb; fact in the incomparable complexity of our DNA, our minds, our hearts, our spirits.

Truth within, truth without are synonyms for the wisdom of our fathers: of Father, Logos, Spirit and of biological giver of life. Atheism is the act, ignorant or willful, of rebellion against and defiance of that wisdom. Father is wisdom of time out of mind--an event anterior to our species memory. Where father is allegory for all mortal ancestors who have come into the world before us down across our hereditary line(s). Father (Logos) is within spirit, mind and body, and without within everything that surrounds us; The Natural and the Metaphysical: living and inert and abstract and theoretical; an idea within an object envisioned by an idea spoken into being; Ultimate Truth.

The atheist knows or suspects this ultimate truth and fact. Yet, he or she is at heart a denier and fearer of truth. While in some cases such fear is understandable, even classifiable as reasonable, continued resistance to ultimate truth or intentional attack against it, is the primeval species totemic representation of child defying Father for assumed arrogance or willful ignorance of knowing better.

Where is/does ultimate Fact and Truth founded/begin? In antediluvian Right and Wrong. Right embodies all that promotes or nourishes human life, individual freedom and identity, personal responsibility, honesty, logic, fact, dialogue, courage, rectitude, wrath, forgiveness, truth, wisdom, love. Wrong embodies antithesis of same. From this ancient foundation arises the ethos of the original or first gift God gave to man: free will.

Therein also lies the dichotomy between believer and masquerading believer (atheist): free will and the waste thereof.

In closing, the atheist serves two roles in the greater human meta-narrative. The first being a benign enough if not tragic one in his dour journey through life--head down, jaw clenched, hands held rigid in place over ears. While the second role resembles the cruel or ignorant child who mercilessly pokes what he assumed was a helpless cat wrapped in a bag when was in reality a nest of hornets. The atheist in this second role can boast pedigree of shared ideology common to murderers of hundreds of millions of fellow human beings; killings carried out in the name of stamping out ultimate Truth and those who since time out of mind have and always shall know it and speak it.

 

[ding]

From an evolutionary standpoint compatible with major religions:

One sees in nature an evolutionary hierarchy of species - those at the lower ends of the hierarchy, such as insects, are the most materialistic - having little mental or spiritual awareness at all other than physical impulses or sensations

While more-evolved species, such as mammals display higher cognitive or mental abilities - those at the highest ends, such as humans - display higher mental and spiritual concepts such as sciences, arts, music, meditation, and dance.

-

If a human embraces materialistic atheism or secularism, he therefore is taking the direction of devolution rather than evolution - as his mind is devolving back in the direction of "beast", embracing base, materialistic pleasures such as sex, porn, and fast food, rather than higher, "spiritual" pleasures such as music and art.

It could be argued then, that those of spiritual enlightenment, are at a higher level of evolution than crasser, materialistic-minded atheists are, and therefore deserving of more humaneness or rights, rather than the false notion that atheists are somehow their "equal".

I'm not sure you can say that those who are spiritually enlightened are more evolutionary advanced than those who aren't. I think you can say they are more self aware.