How Atheists Think
 

[QUOTE=only_human;390547][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies[/url][/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/19/living/atheist-10-commandments/index.html?hpt=hp_t2[/url]

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;390604][url]http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/19/living/atheist-10-commandments/index.html?hpt=hp_t2[/url][/QUOTE]

I would have replaced one of these (I'm not sure which one) with:

The right to practice religion does not convey the right to cause harm or
discriminate against others because of one's religious beliefs.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;390604][url]http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/19/living/atheist-10-commandments/index.html?hpt=hp_t2[/url][/QUOTE]
Thank you, I like this list very much so I will quote it here.
A group of 13 judges selected 10 ideas out of 2800 submissions from 18 countries and 27 U.S. states and announced the winners Friday:
[QUOTE]Here are the "Ten Non-Commandments" chosen as the winners:
1. Be open-minded and be willing to alter your beliefs with new evidence.
2. Strive to understand what is most likely to be true, not to believe what you wish to be true.
3. The scientific method is the most reliable way of understanding the natural world.
4. Every person has the right to control of their body.
5. God is not necessary to be a good person or to live a full and meaningful life.
6. Be mindful of the consequences of all your actions and recognize that you must take responsibility for them.
7. Treat others as you would want them to treat you, and can reasonably expect them to want to be treated. Think about their perspective.
8. We have the responsibility to consider others, including future generations.
9. There is no one right way to live.
10. Leave the world a better place than you found it.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;390605]I would have replaced one of these (I'm not sure which one) with:

The right to practice religion does not convey the right to cause harm or
discriminate against others because of one's religious beliefs.[/QUOTE]That goes in an addendum, The Bill of Rights." So from the context of rights, number 4, although no less important, should also be grouped under rights.

[url]http://www.atheistmindhumanistheart.com/all-judges/[/url]
[QUOTE]MEET OUR JUDGES WHO SELECTED THE TEN WINNING BELIEFS

Adam Savage
Co-host of the Discovery Channel television series MythBusters

Robyn Blumner
Executive Director, Richard Dawkins Foundation

Greg Epstein
Humanist Chaplain, Harvard. Author of the New York Times Bestselling book, Good Without God

Gordon Bower
Cognitive Psychologist, Stanford University, National Medal of Science recipient

Andrew Copson
Chief Executive, British Humanist Association

Hemant Mehta
blogger at FriendlyAtheist.com and author of The Young Atheist's Survival Guide

Greta Christina
Atheist feminist writer and blogger and author of Coming Out Atheist

Dan Barker
Co-President of the Freedom from Religion Foundation and and host of Freethought Radio

Matt Dillahunty
TV Host of The Atheist Experience

Faisal Al Mutar
Founder of the Global Secular Humanist Movement & Secular Post

Dave Silverman
President of American Atheists

Amanda Metskas
Executive director of Camp Quest

August E. Brunsman IV
Executive Director at Secular Student Alliance[/QUOTE]

So, I would change number 4 to:
[QUOTE]4. Every person has the [strike]right[/strike] [B]responsibility[/B] to control [strike]of[/strike] their body.[/QUOTE]
But when changed like that it is covered by number 6, so it can be deleted.

Then appending a list of rights:[QUOTE]
1. The right to practice religion[Indent]This right does not convey the right to cause harm or discriminate against others because of one's religious beliefs.[/indent]
2. Every person has the right to control of their body.[/QUOTE]
I think that commandments/non-commandments dictate a person's actions and responsibilities but rights should be separate because they are self-evident truths or necessary based on the former, or are statements of scope.

PS: Any relation to the Silverman in the list of Judges?

[QUOTE=only_human;39060]
[STRIKE]So, I would change number 4 to:

But when changed like that it is covered by number 6, so it can be deleted.

Then appending a list of rights:
I think that commandments/non-commandments dictate a person's actions and responsibilities but rights should be separate because they are self-evident truths or necessary based on the former, or are statements of scope.[/STRIKE][/QUOTE]I like the list better than my one hour of tinkering with it.

[URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/12/seminaries-science-grant_n_5955030.html?utm_hp_ref=religion-science"]10 American Seminaries To Receive $1.5 Million In Grants To Include Science In Curricula[/URL]

[QUOTE](RNS) Responding to a real or perceived gap between science and faith, 10 U.S. seminaries will receive a combined $1.5 million in grants to include science in their curricula, the American Association for the Advancement of Science announced Wednesday (Oct. 8).

A diverse set of Christian seminaries will be awarded grants ranging from $90,000 to $200,000 provided by the John Templeton Foundation, which has funded various efforts to bridge science and faith, including $3.75 million to AAAS for the project.

“Many (religious leaders) don’t get a lot of science in their training and yet they become the authority figures that many people in society look up to for advice for all kinds of things, including issues related to science and technology,” said Jennifer Wiseman, director of the AAAS Dialogue on Science, Ethics and Religion.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;390605]I would have replaced one of these (I'm not sure which one) with:
The right to practice religion does not convey the right to cause harm or
discriminate against others because of one's religious beliefs.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, although I would have said: "Freedom of and from religion shall
not be abridged."

The rest is just the Golden Rule: "Do not do unto others what you wouldn't have
others do unto you."

Non-discrimination and non-harm-causing are corollaries of this golden rule.

The golden rule doesn't really work well with masochists. They would all go around hurting others because that is what they want others to do to them.

[QUOTE=retina;390620]The golden rule doesn't really work well with masochists. They would all go around hurting others because that is what they want others to do to them.[/QUOTE]

And that's what laws and governments are for - to catch those who hurt others,
and if necessary punish them, with jail or in extreme cases worse.

Justice must not be ignored, and is the cure for sado-masochism acted upon
to the criminal detriment of others.

[QUOTE=retina;390620]The golden rule doesn't really work well with masochists. They would all go around hurting others because that is what they want others to do to them.[/QUOTE]

I protest that this is a very simplistic take on masochists. While it is fun to play on the contradictions (sadist refuses to beat masochist because masochist likes it), it does not really acknowledge human complexity.

[QUOTE=kladner;390627]I protest that this is a very simplistic take on masochists. While it is fun to play on the contradictions (sadist refuses to beat masochist because masochist likes it), it does not really acknowledge human complexity.[/QUOTE]Whoosh.