# How do we?



## ddd-shooter (Jun 3, 2013)

... live as atheists? (Imagine a new civilization please)
How do we set up government?
How do we establish morals?
How do we make day to day decisions?
How do we establish a criminal justice system? 
How do we communicate to other civilizations?


----------



## TheBishop (Jun 3, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> ... live as atheists? (Imagine a new civilization please)
> How do we set up government?


Pretty much what we have now with a constitution, and the way our fore father intended.  A government free from the influence of belief.  


> How do we establish morals?


No need they will establish themselves according to the  culture.


> How do we make day to day decisions?


Using sound judgement and reason.


> How do we establish a criminal justice system?


Based on Rights.


> How do we communicate to other civilizations?


You mean like aliens, or all the civilization we commincate with already that have varying beliefs?


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 3, 2013)

I'm talking about simply adding a new civilization to our earth. How will it interact with other states? 
I was hoping for a 'why' as well


----------



## TheBishop (Jun 3, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> I'm talking about simply adding a new civilization to our earth. How will it interact with other states?
> I was hoping for a 'why' as well



If it held "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness" as it's must fundamental axiom it will most likely be the most peaceful society to ever exsist.


----------



## Four (Jun 3, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> ... live as atheists? (Imagine a new civilization please)
> How do we set up government?
> How do we establish morals?
> How do we make day to day decisions?
> ...



I kept almost writing a post... but it ends up just being me describing what i would consider a ideal society... and very loosely has anything to do with atheism...


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 3, 2013)

Please, post away. 
Why is freedom important?


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 3, 2013)

TheBishop said:


> If it held "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness" as it's must fundamental axiom it will most likely be the most peaceful society to ever exsist.



I find it humorous these rights were first professed to be endowed to us by our creator.

Also, have you read Locke? He first proposed life, liberty and property.
Not trying to be political, but understanding the impact a worldview has on how we shape or would shape civilizations.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> I find it humorous these rights were first professed to be endowed to us by our creator.
> 
> Also, have you read Locke? He first proposed life, liberty and property.
> Not trying to be political, but understanding the impact a worldview has on how we shape or would shape civilizations.



Does it specify WHICH creator?


----------



## TheBishop (Jun 3, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> I find it humorous these rights were first professed to be endowed to us by our creator.
> 
> Also, have you read Locke? He first proposed life, liberty and property.
> Not trying to be political, but understanding the impact a worldview has on how we shape or would shape civilizations.



Second treatise of government on my nook now.  I understand his position has major religious influence. It's good stuff and part of the back bone of our constitution.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 3, 2013)

bullethead said:


> Does it specify WHICH creator?



No, and thank goodness. The last thing I would want myself is a theocracy. Separation of church and state is fine. Where some take it can be very slippery in my opinion.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 3, 2013)

TheBishop said:


> Pretty much what we have now with a constitution, and the way our fore father intended.  A government free from the influence of belief.
> I'm not sure that was their intent. In fact, some of them had strong beliefs that influenced them. What they wisely refrained from was setting up an endorsed religion. But the first amendment is clear that one's free exercise of ANY religion be of utmost importance.
> 
> No need they will establish themselves according to the  culture.
> ...



Not picking, just some thoughts.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> ... live as atheists?



My first thought was that there's nothing new about that idea.  Russia, China, North Korea are all relatively recent examples of that concept being applied.  It's a splendid concept as long as one totally ignores our inherent depravity.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> No, and thank goodness. The last thing I would want myself is a theocracy. Separation of church and state is fine. Where some take it can be very slippery in my opinion.



Right. But a creator could be any one of the Gods or it could be nature. Sometimes we are too quick to assume that a word means exactly what want/believe. Creator is a very vague word.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 3, 2013)

bullethead said:


> Right. But a creator could be any one of the Gods or it could be nature. Sometimes we are too quick to assume that a word means exactly what want/believe. Creator is a very vague word.



I agree. But the fact that He (whoever you feel necessary) is there is extremely significant in my opinion. There were no words used that were not scrutinized and chosen to best match their sentiments.


----------



## ted_BSR (Jun 3, 2013)

TheBishop said:


> Pretty much what we have now with a constitution, and the way our fore father intended.  A government free from the influence of belief.
> 
> No need they will establish themselves according to the  culture.
> 
> ...



I don't believe that is correct. It means, the government can't tell you what to believe. It does not remove the influence of belief from the government.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 5, 2013)

SemperFiDawg said:


> My first thought was that there's nothing new about that idea.  Russia, China, North Korea are all relatively recent examples of that concept being applied.  It's a splendid concept as long as one totally ignores our inherent depravity.



So do we say atheism has no chance to be practically applied at a macro level?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 5, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> So do we say atheism has no chance to be practically applied at a macro level?



Realistically how much more macro does it get than an entire Continent (Asia) when both the USSR and China were under communism?


----------



## Four (Jun 6, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> ... live as atheists? (Imagine a new civilization please)
> How do we set up government?
> How do we establish morals?
> How do we make day to day decisions?
> ...



What of these is different than most existing civilizations? You could answer these questions by looking at most governments today.

In the image below, blue means there is NO state religion. Red means that there is. Grey is ambiguous / no data.


----------



## TheBishop (Jun 6, 2013)

ted_BSR said:


> I don't believe that is correct. It means, the government can't tell you what to believe. It does not remove the influence of belief from the government.



James Madison, Diest Author of our Constituion.



> Nothwithstanding the general progress made within the two last centuries in favour of this branch of liberty, & the full establishment of it, in some parts of our Country, there remains in others a strong bias towards the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between Gov' & Religion neither can be duly supported: Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such its corrupting influence on both the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded agst.. And in a Gov' of opinion, like ours, the only effectual guard must be found in the soundness and stability of the general opinion on the subject. Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Gov will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together; [James Madison, Letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822, The Writings of James Madison, Gaillard Hunt]



Right from the man that gave us the contract between government and the people. He KNEW the dangers of a government influenced by religion, and why it was extremely important to guard against it.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 6, 2013)

Four said:


> What of these is different than most existing civilizations? You could answer these questions by looking at most governments today.
> 
> In the image below, blue means there is NO state religion. Red means that there is. Grey is ambiguous / no data.



No, but religion is tolerated in these countries. 
A lot of modern atheists posit that a world without religion and its influences would be BETTER. 
What would that world look like in reference to the questions above?


----------



## Four (Jun 7, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> No, but religion is tolerated in these countries.
> A lot of modern atheists posit that a world without religion and its influences would be BETTER.
> What would that world look like in reference to the questions above?



Nearly the same. Just because religion is tolerated in those countries doesn't mean it has anything to do with how it's run.

I do think a world without religion would be better... but doesn't mean i'd support a government that punishes thought crime.. that's in the realm of religion.


----------



## ddd-shooter (Jun 7, 2013)

To say these countries act free of religious influence is crazy. I simply thought many here would have a utopian society mapped out for us. My bad.


----------



## Four (Jun 7, 2013)

ddd-shooter said:


> To say these countries act free of religious influence is crazy. I simply thought many here would have a utopian society mapped out for us. My bad.



I think its likely we do, but it doesn't really have anything to do with atheism, just political ideology.


----------

