Wortfish wrote:The International and Ethical Humanist Union has published its 7th annual report on the treatment of atheists across the globe: https://freethoughtreport.com/download-the-report/

The report focuses mostly on Muslim countries as places where atheists are most in danger, even for their lives,

This states that atheists are more in danger in islamic countries than others. What evidence do you have that this is not so?

Even for their lives, is a clear enough statement - the fact that apostasy is the route to this, does not make it untrue. While the law may allow inherited atheism, the lynching mobs in Pakistan for example have very different ideas.

So your pedantic defence of the official treatment of atheists in islamic countries rings very hollow.

Wortfish wrote:
Human rights groups do claim that certain religious and non-religious people in Iran are discriminated against, but there are no credible reports of atheists being prosecuted, let alone being put to death, for publicly admitting that they are atheists. Is this report yet another spurious attempt by humanists and atheists to claim that they are being severely repressed and persecuted in Muslim countries when this is not the case at all?

Reporting from Iran is rather limited. One issue for atheists in all islamic country is that being an unbeliever automatically falls foul of blasphemy laws, since it is obviously disrespectful to the prophet - and those that wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.


As to the religious beliefs in Iran, most Iranians I have met when there were Zoroastrians in private, and Muslim in any company they did not fully trust. So I see little value in quoting official statistics.

Alan B wrote:
Ah-ha! I can see the religious 'legal eagles' getting around this one - 'Atheism' is a NON-belief, so they are 'fair game'.

Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

Pebble wrote:
Reporting from Iran is rather limited. One issue for atheists in all islamic country is that being an unbeliever automatically falls foul of blasphemy laws, since it is obviously disrespectful to the prophet - and those that wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

No. Blasphemy refers to profane and sacriligeous talk. Simply not beleiving in the prophethood of Muhammad does make you guilty of blasphemy.

Wortfish wrote:

Alan B wrote:
Ah-ha! I can see the religious 'legal eagles' getting around this one - 'Atheism' is a NON-belief, so they are 'fair game'.

Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

Not true.

Theism is a belief, atheism is a lack of belief.

It's a bit like calling "not stamp collecting" a hobby.

You know this yet choose to post a lie.

Wortfish wrote:

Alan B wrote:
Ah-ha! I can see the religious 'legal eagles' getting around this one - 'Atheism' is a NON-belief, so they are 'fair game'.

Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

Still lying for jesus I see.
Seeing as you've been corrected on this dishonest bullshit multiple times, in multiple threads.

Wortfish wrote:

Pebble wrote:
Reporting from Iran is rather limited. One issue for atheists in all islamic country is that being an unbeliever automatically falls foul of blasphemy laws, since it is obviously disrespectful to the prophet - and those that wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

No. Blasphemy refers to profane and sacriligeous talk. Simply not beleiving in the prophethood of Muhammad does make you guilty of blasphemy.

Except for the fact that you're nowhere near an authority on Islamic rules concerning sacrilige, never mind someone in authority in Iran. Evidently, you're still trying push your rectal matter as facts.

Wortfish wrote:Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

No.

From the Oxford English Dictionary: atheism - Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

From Merriam Webster: atheism - a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods.

Atheism simply means 'without God'. It neither stipulates a belief that there is no god, nor a lack of belief, so, sensu stricto, it can be either.

You may find that 80% or thereabouts of people who describe themselves as atheists belong to the latter group.

Wortfish wrote:
Atheism ( sensu stricto ) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God

That is gnostic atheism but most non believers are actually agnostic atheists
Also God is not a single monolithic entity but instead many interpretations
[ monotheistic / deistic / pagan / pantheistic / panentheistic etc etc etc ]

Wortfish wrote:

Pebble wrote:
Reporting from Iran is rather limited. One issue for atheists in all islamic country is that being an unbeliever automatically falls foul of blasphemy laws, since it is obviously disrespectful to the prophet - and those that wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

No. Blasphemy refers to profane and sacriligeous talk. Simply not beleiving in the prophethood of Muhammad does make you guilty of blasphemy.

Right. But stating that you don't believe that God exists is to terminally butthurt religionists tantamount to saying "The prophet Muhammad/Jesus/Moses was wrong/delusional/a liar", so even just declaring your nonbelief to another person can be taken as disrespectful to the prophet(s), and those who wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

You're confusing what takes place in the privacy of people's own head, and what happens in conversation and the consequences thereof. Some people really take deep offence that their pet mythology is being questioned or denied even if it is stated in mild or neutral fashion.

Of course, to some people even the mere act of not believing, and stating that much if and only ever if directly questioned about it, is an act of sin and blasphemy.

Wortfish wrote:

Pebble wrote:
Reporting from Iran is rather limited. One issue for atheists in all islamic country is that being an unbeliever automatically falls foul of blasphemy laws, since it is obviously disrespectful to the prophet - and those that wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

No. Blasphemy refers to profane and sacriligeous talk. Simply not beleiving in the prophethood of Muhammad does make you guilty of blasphemy.

Obviously have not been keeping up with the Asia Bibi case, shows you how easy it is to have your life ruined by religious bigots over there.

Wortfish wrote:

Alan B wrote:
Ah-ha! I can see the religious 'legal eagles' getting around this one - 'Atheism' is a NON-belief, so they are 'fair game'.

Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

Nope.

Wortfish wrote:
Atheism ( sensu stricto ) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God

[ Try and read this with an open mind as it will stop you from repeating the error you have made here ]

This is hackenslashs definition which I really like because it is so clinical and therefore leaves absolutely no wiggle room

Atheism is the non acceptance of a specific truth claim with regard to specific entities [ metaphysical / supernatural ]

As you can see it does not reject or deny the God claim but is instead sceptical of it because of a lack of evidence. Very often theists will move the goalposts by bastardising the meaning of evidence rather than actually provide some. The most common way that they do this is to claim that first person subjective experience can be evidence. Unfortunately it cannot be because evidence has to be inter subjective and capable of independent verification. Zero verification therefore equals zero evidence
And as God is non falsifiable by definition then his existence cannot be empirically demonstrated. Like I said : no wiggle room

Wortfish wrote:Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

Utter bollocks!

Read my Sig.

Rumraket wrote:
Right. But stating that you don't believe that God exists is to terminally butthurt religionists tantamount to saying "The prophet Muhammad/Jesus/Moses was wrong/delusional/a liar", so even just declaring your nonbelief to another person can be taken as disrespectful to the prophet(s), and those who wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

Not believing in God could be seen as a lack of understanding or perception. It doesn't have to mean that you think the prophet Muhammad was a liar or delusional. There are some liberal Muslims who don't think Muhammad received a special revelation from God, as his followers would later claim, but rather than he was a special person who reformed Arabian society for the better.

You're confusing what takes place in the privacy of people's own head, and what happens in conversation and the consequences thereof. Some people really take deep offence that their pet mythology is being questioned or denied even if it is stated in mild or neutral fashion. Of course, to some people even the mere act of not believing, and stating that much if and only ever if directly questioned about it, is an act of sin and blasphemy.

There is a difference between admitting in public your atheism and engading in Islamophobic vitriol.

Wortfish wrote:

Alan B wrote:
Ah-ha! I can see the religious 'legal eagles' getting around this one - 'Atheism' is a NON-belief, so they are 'fair game'.

Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

This is the asinine view of somebody who thinks that words have intrinsic meaning. They do not, they have usage, which varies from place to place and throughout time. Language evolves, unlike the muddled thinking of idiot apologists.

Wortfish wrote:Not believing in God could be seen as a lack of understanding or perception.

Who gives a flying fuck what it could be 'seen' as? If some dipshit wants to claim not believing in his invisible friend is lack of understanding or perception they'll have to show their working. Good luck with that.

Wortfish wrote:

Alan B wrote:
Ah-ha! I can see the religious 'legal eagles' getting around this one - 'Atheism' is a NON-belief, so they are 'fair game'.

Atheism (sensu stricto) is the fundamental belief or position that there is no God.

God is a character in tall stories made up by ignorant people of long ago. This isn't necessarily atheism as you'd define it; you might be better off calling it 'impiety' or 'irreverence', but those terms were more applicable when everybody was pious, even if they believed there was no God. If you're happy with God as a fictional character as an alternative to there being no God, you are entirely welcome to it. If you have another alternative, by all means show that it isn't a copy of old stories made up by ignorant people of long ago.

Wortfish wrote:

Pebble wrote:
Reporting from Iran is rather limited. One issue for atheists in all islamic country is that being an unbeliever automatically falls foul of blasphemy laws, since it is obviously disrespectful to the prophet - and those that wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

No. Blasphemy refers to profane and sacriligeous talk. Simply not beleiving in the prophethood of Muhammad does make you guilty of blasphemy.

So it goes in protecting the tarnished reputations of ignorant people of long ago who made up a lot of tall stories to whitewash their ignorance. Those people were ignorant of the theory of evolution you have such a problem with. They were so ignorant of it, they never complained it was a problem for them. They also never complained that atheism was a problem for them, but that was because everyone was pious, whether or not they believed. Your problem is more particularly with people saying there is no God; you don't much care what they believe as long as you don't have to hear it.

Wortfish wrote:Not believing in God could be seen as a lack of understanding or perception.

No shit, Sherlock. It IS seen as a lack of understanding or perception, mainly by dullards whose understanding and perception could really stand to bend a few more spoons in demonstrating their mettle. But really, it's mainly seen as a lack of piety. See above.

Wortfish wrote:

Rumraket wrote:
Right. But stating that you don't believe that God exists is to terminally butthurt religionists tantamount to saying "The prophet Muhammad/Jesus/Moses was wrong/delusional/a liar", so even just declaring your nonbelief to another person can be taken as disrespectful to the prophet(s), and those who wish to make an issue of it can easily do so.

Not believing in God could be seen as a lack of understanding or perception.

Or a complete lack of evidence for it's existence.

Wortfish wrote: It doesn't have to mean that you think the prophet Muhammad was a liar or delusional. There are some liberal Muslims who don't think Muhammad received a special revelation from God, as his followers would later claim, but rather than he was a special person who reformed Arabian society for the better.

Once again, you're neither an Islamic theologian nor an authority on blasphemy laws in Muslim countries, so you can stop pretending that you're in any position to make claims about those subjects.

Wortfish wrote:

You're confusing what takes place in the privacy of people's own head, and what happens in conversation and the consequences thereof. Some people really take deep offence that their pet mythology is being questioned or denied even if it is stated in mild or neutral fashion. Of course, to some people even the mere act of not believing, and stating that much if and only ever if directly questioned about it, is an act of sin and blasphemy.

There is a difference between admitting in public your atheism and engading in Islamophobic vitriol.

There's a difference in engaging in an honest discussion and vapid trolling.
Unfortunately you consistently choose the latter.

Wortfish wrote:
Where are there reports of atheists being put to death in Iran for publicly admitting that they are atheists? Just one will do.

Iran is an Islamic republic, meaning that it Islam as its state religion. It was set forth in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which was ratified in 1979. It states that:

the One God (as stated in the phrase "There is no other god except God "), His exclusive sovereignty and right to legislate, and the necessity of submission to His commands;

This makes a theocracy, thus it is illegal to be an apostate or a non-believer.

Wortfish wrote:
Trouble is, there are no actual reports of any atheist in those countries (which includes Malaysia) being sentenced to death for being an atheist. They just assume that "apostasy laws" mean that this is the case.

Apostasy (/əˈpɒstəsi/; Greek: ἀποστασία apostasia, "a defection or revolt") is the formal disaffiliation from, or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person.

This includes atheists, people who do not believe in any god. Islam is the state religion, thus, you will go to prison if you blive otherwise.