Do atheists appreciate life here on earth more than christians?

November 17, 2008 on 6:07 pm | By | In bluefreesky.com | Do atheists appreciate life here on earth more than christians?
  • Atheists believe this is our only shot at existence, so I would think that an atheist would value their life here on earth more than a christian, because the christian believes they get another shot at existence in never never land.


  • Hi

    No really, We all appreciate life the same. We all want to live and no one wants to die but we will...

    Shalom (peace)!


  • Of course they do, you answered your own question


  • Some do some don't. What you are doing is stereotyping a very LARGE group of people.

    Some are murders that take others life, some live life to the fullest.


  • Yes because we dont forsake this life in exchange for some fairy tale ending a.k.a heaven


  • no but heres a thought
    for believers this is as bad as it gets...but for agnostics this is as good as it gets!!


  • I Don't think so.


  • It is difficult to make a generalization of this magnitude and consider the conclusion true. The appreciation of life depends primarily on how we practice rational reasoning. Most people hold an extreme number of irrational beliefs and ideas, but in fact they do not live by what they believe, they practice rational ideas which make it possible to achieve happiness in this world - the next can wait. So, many so called believers in the afterlife tend to act very much like those who know that this is the only life for which a family has value, a satisfying job has value, a personal hobby has value, achievement and success have value, etcetera. If the believers in the afterlife PRACTICED their philosophy, they would actively seek to be like the role models they admire - the saints, the martyrs, those who choose poverty and seek no advantages from this life.


  • they appreciate serving themselves and bringing into fruition the theory of survival of the fittest

    but Christians definitely appreciate the lives of other people a lot more as is evident by the fact they they statistically help the poor more than atheists by giving to charity and volunteering their time, not only Christians but people of any religion in general

    if you don't believe that people even have souls why would you care to help them, their not going anywhere when they die right



  • I cannot, and would not, presume to know the minds of all, or any, Christians. That would be stupid and foolhardy for anyone to do to another.

    For me, I like my life just fine...


  • Considering Christians ignore the threat of global warming and kill animals for sport, atheists do appreciate life and this planet much more that Christians.


  • I think that's apparent given the fact that the Christian Right is dead set on exploiting and ravaging the Earth's resources. Atheists tend to be left-wingers, which corresponds with environmentalism and conservation before corporate interests.


  • Dr William B. Provine, Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University says:
    â ˜Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear â ¦ There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. Thatâ ™s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either.â ™
    Reference
    Provine, W.B., Origins Research 16(1), p.9, 1994.


    â ˜We no longer feel ourselves to be guests in someone elseâ ™s home and therefore obliged to make our behavior conform with a set of pre-existing cosmic rules. It is our creation now. We make the rules. We establish the parameters of reality. We create the world, and because we do, we no longer feel beholden to outside forces. We no longer have to justify our behavior, for we are now the architects of the universe. We are responsible to nothing outside ourselves, for we are the kingdom, the power, and the glory for ever and ever.â ™
    Reference
    Jeremy Rifkin, Algeny, p. 244 (Viking Press, New York), 1983.


    Gerard: â ˜ ... I think that some people may have an inability to cope, and maybe this might sound a bit extreme, but that might be Darwinian theory, the Darwin theory of survival of the fittest. Maybe some of us arenâ ™t meant to survive, maybe some of us are meant to kill ourselves â ¦
    â ˜Thereâ ™s too many people in the world as it is. Maybe it is survival of the fittest, maybe some of us are meant to just give up, and maybe that would help the species.â ™
    Reference
    ABC (Australia) radio, Life Matters with Norman Swan, 4 May 2000: â ˜Black Dog Daysâ ”The Experience and Treatment of Depressionâ ™

    Darwin versus Compassion:
    The full title of Darwinâ ™s Magnum Opus is Origin of the Species by means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of the Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Darwinâ ™s other writings reveal how barbarous evolutionary philosophy can be:
    With savages, the weak in body and mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of everyone to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands who, from a weak constitution, would formerly have succumbed to smallpox. Thus the weak members of civilised society propagate their kind.
    No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but, excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
    The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered in the manner previously indicated more tender and more widely diffused. Nor can we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature â ¦ We must, therefore, bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind.
    (Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 2nd Ed., pp. 133â “134, 1887)


    Yeah, athiests must feel that life is more rewarding ... REALY?


  • That is a common sentiment among atheists.


  • Most likely.