Does the media promote atheism?

[RobbyS]

Does the modern definition of secularism, with its penchant for relativism fit the examples you stated?

Robespierre and Danton did not respect alternative viewpoints - they both attempted to force a set of principles down the throats of the French people. The Parisians took to it quite well, the rest of France did not.

This isn’t the political correctness that is currently held up as an icon for civic discourse.

Most liberals are not “relativists” when their per doctrines are challenged. They have the same attitude as the French Revolutionaries. As Edmund Burke said, prejudice serves to moderate our responses, if the prejudices are based on truth. If we let people make up their own” truths" and expect people to adhere to adhere to them, we will soon find ourselves using force to compel them to act “reasonably.” Tradition is a better guide than snap-judgements made in response to contingencies.

 

[RobbyS]

And why shouldn’t you be involved? But at least you are admitting that you have a secular viewpoint as well as a religious one.

In regard to politics for example, you can, indeed must, base your personal decisions on your religious beliefs. But within a secular society (in which we both live), your arguments for a particular viewpoint must be secular and not religious. So for example, if you wanted gay marriages to be illegal because they are sinful, then that argument wouldn’t be valid. It is specifically a religious argument.

You’d need to turn on that secular part of your brain and make a secular argument such as there would be a specific harm to society and you’d have to make your case. Then everyone can debate on equal terms.

I think it false it a dangerous dualism to separate the religious and the secular. Christianity is an incarnational religion. Modern secularism just takes materialism as self-evidently true, and the “soul” as mere epiphenomenon of the material. Religion then then becomes nothing more than opinion. , created more by emotion as than throught. Indeed. thought itself is so regarded. Not rational animals, as Aristotle said, but mere machines.

 

[Crescentinus]

I thought that the mainstream media is going to preach more anti-Catholicism than the Ku Klux Klan.

 

[RobbyS]

1. The media is not all about making money. Only a handful of corporations control most media in the United States. The owners of those corporations don’t go to work every day just to count their pennies. They have and do use their access to millions of eyeballs to support certain things and to ignore and disparage other things.

A) The media is hostile to religion, with Christianity at the top of the list. It does promote people who rail against religion, like Penn Jillette.

"On Monday evening, magician, comedian, author and outspoken atheist Penn Jillette spoke at a Barnes & Noble in Manhattan, New York, about his thoughts on secularism and his most recent book, “God, No!” "

So, let’s look at secularism: “indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations.”

And let’s look at Secular Humanism: secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=what_is

It is quite clear that secular humanists and secularists, don’t want anything to do with God/gods or religion, and would not mind you joining them. The very strong - dogmatic - disconnect with religion means that they are not theists, and in the example with Pen Jillette, are active in promoting a Non-God way of living.

B) While the “other religion” receiving criticism is handled a bit more gently, Catholics are not. A bit of history:

americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=606

C) Bill Maher. "Nuff said. George Carlin is no longer with us.

Peace,
Ed

The media is owned by elite opinion, and elite opinion has pretty much abandoned Christianity

 

[edwest2]

And why shouldn’t you be involved? But at least you are admitting that you have a secular viewpoint as well as a religious one.

In regard to politics for example, you can, indeed must, base your personal decisions on your religious beliefs. But within a secular society (in which we both live), your arguments for a particular viewpoint must be secular and not religious. So for example, if you wanted gay marriages to be illegal because they are sinful, then that argument wouldn’t be valid. It is specifically a religious argument.

You’d need to turn on that secular part of your brain and make a secular argument such as there would be a specific harm to society and you’d have to make your case. Then everyone can debate on equal terms.

Let me explain “secular” in this way. God can be known through human reason without resorting to religion. Or, in the gay marriage example, simple Biology tells us the anus is not a sex organ, and that the male and female of the species have organs designed for sex with each other.

I do not have a detached “secular” viewpoint, as in, the only way to have a true, normal argument over an issue must exclude religious considerations. I know how much some wish that the world would just keep their religion at home or in some other building, while only secularists are the true, and only voice that needs to be heard. The clear implication being that religion is invalid or unnecessary.

I think people need to wake up and realize that truth does not come solely from the human mind. And I watched over the previous decades, as some major global societies gradually abandoned that sort of truth, including some Christians, and it has led to pagan, by which I mean, godless living. Both young and old Catholics are seeing the rotten fruit of the last 40 years, and we are not going to try to swallow it anymore.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Bradski]

Let me explain “secular” in this way…in the gay marriage example, simple Biology tells us the anus is not a sex organ, and that the male and female of the species have organs designed for sex with each other.

Well, yes, I do realise that that just about sums up your definition of the secular argument in this case. Tab A does not go into slot B, therefore gay marriage should not be allowed. It’s a simple biological argument. What could be clearer? Or more asinine. One only has to scratch the surface of the ‘secular argument’ to find the religious one hiding underneath: ‘They can’t procreate’.

I do not have a detached “secular” viewpoint, as in, the only way to have a true, normal argument over an issue must exclude religious considerations.

In the case above, I’d agree. But others can do it. There are very many religious people and many religious countries that are also secular. If you compare them to theocracies, I know which one most people would prefer to live in.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I wouldn’t say it promotes atheism. It promotes postmodern thinking and moral relativism, but those aren’t quite atheism. It promotes people to be so accepting that they won’t call anyone else’s beliefs false. I hear “everyone has their own truth,” or “religions should coexist,” a lot, but not “God doesn’t exist.”

Brilliant post!

 

[The_Reginator]

I do not have a detached “secular” viewpoint, as in, the only way to have a true, normal argument over an issue must exclude religious considerations. I know how much some wish that the world would just keep their religion at home or in some other building,** while only secularists are the true, and only voice that needs to be heard**. The clear implication being that religion is invalid or unnecessary.

I think people need to wake up and realize that truth does not come solely from the human mind. And I watched over the previous decades, as some major global societies gradually abandoned that sort of truth, including some Christians, and it has led to pagan, by which I mean, godless living. Both young and old Catholics are seeing the rotten fruit of the last 40 years, and we are not going to try to swallow it anymore.

Peace,
Ed

Indeed, Ed, that is really irksome.
This assumption that the secular point of view is pure and not influenced by any unproven ideas. I see that all too often.
The problem I’ve seen for years is that people do not take time to analyze their assumptions.
We all start with assumptions, but non-believers often sound as though they really think that their world view is unencumbered by any. Catholics know and recognize what assumptions we begin with.
Just my couple of cents.
Now back to the OP …

 

[edwest2]

Well, yes, I do realise that that just about sums up your definition of the secular argument in this case. Tab A does not go into slot B, therefore gay marriage should not be allowed. It’s a simple biological argument. What could be clearer? Or more asinine. One only has to scratch the surface of the ‘secular argument’ to find the religious one hiding underneath: ‘They can’t procreate’.

In the case above, I’d agree. But others can do it. There are very many religious people and many religious countries that are also secular. If you compare them to theocracies, I know which one most people would prefer to live in.

We’re on a CATHOLIC message board. Who’s hiding anything? Unless your actual argument is: We can’t allow any religious thinking in the public square. Is that it? Do you think the only answer is the secular answer? Long before man began writing things down, he figured out the sex part.

Sorry - this conversation will go nowhere if you insist that “equal” is only what you decide it is. Everything is permissible until those irrational, magical thinking, religious nuts start spouting off. Or is it, I’m completely tolerant of everyone except “them.”?

The Theocracy - the worst nightmare scenario for the anti-theists.

Oh yeah, there are too many religious people living like pagans, including Catholics. That’s not just my assessment, I heard a religious say as much on Catholic Radio.

Again: Secular: “of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests.”

Catholics will not be silent or silenced, and the media is doing a great job of promoting pagan and secular thinking. No God allowed, except for brief quotes for the purpose of mockery.

Peace,
Ed

 

[thesmiter1]

The culture in-general today promotes secular humanism and relativism (except where it opposes the secular humanist agenda). Of course, with this relativism comes a requirement that secular humanism be accepted and that religious principles or morality be kept at Sunday Mass.

 

[CrimsonThorn]

What is it called when they constantly mock and belittle beliefs?

Pretty much this.

The idea seems to be “every religion should coexist and have a right to their belief, except Christianity.”

 

[sophion]

Not that it actually promotes atheism. What happens is that the media makes more money from ridiculing religious beliefs and scandals!