Is Astrology religion for those of us with no religion?

[_canpakes]

no worries, clearly you have had your fill.

Well, it does mix well with curelom and cumom.

[_Dr. Shades]

Half of the stardust in our bodies come from faraway galaxies.

That's incorrect. Precisely 0% of the stardust in our bodies ("in" being a misnomer, because our bodies are 100% made of "stardust") came from faraway galaxies. . . things in faraway galaxies, other than light, can't get here.

Every element in our solar system heavier than helium--to include every element in us--was formed when our original star went supernova. The resulting nebulaic cloud condensed to form our current solar system as it exists today.

So, the "stardust" (a.k.a., every element heavier than helium) of our bodies didn't even come from faraway stars, much less faraway galaxies.

Doesn't that make you wonder at the marvel of it all?

Not really. It's all quite predictable and mundane.

[_Jersey Girl]

Just want to go on record saying that I think Astrology is BS.

Signed,
Pisces
;-)

[_Chap]

...
Every element in our solar system heavier than helium--to include every element in us--was formed when our original star went supernova. The resulting nebulaic cloud condensed to form our current solar system as it exists today.

So, the "stardust" (a.k.a., every element heavier than helium) of our bodies didn't even come from faraway stars, much less faraway galaxies.

You're probably right about the 'distant galaxies' point. But I don't think you'll find that you can get all the elements found on earth from a single supernova. See for instance this annotated periodic table at

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171024.html

It's all quite predictable and mundane.

It took a lot of very clever and dedicated people years of work to find that stuff out. The fact that it was possible for human beings to do that made me feel a little proud of our species, not a feeling I often have nowadays.

But now it turns out that we could just have asked you and saved ourselves all that trouble. The universe is now a slightly duller place than it was before ...

[_subgenius]

... because they maintain the Christian traditions that permeate their society/life/existence....they have no other well to draw from.

Looks like you are putting the cart before the horse. It appears that what you could call “Christian tradition” can also be seen to exist outside of that religion, and has a history predating it, as well.

Yes, and I never claimed that Christianity was the point of origin...what i did claim was that modern Western atheists are the product of Christian traditions. That atheists were raised and educated in an environment "permeated" with Christianity with regards to culture, custom, and "etiquette". So, while "do not steal" can be found elsewhere and in other times, the society with which the modern atheist exists within found "do not steal" because of Christianity and by how Christianity translated such.

see the difference?

You can try to credit “Christianity” with being the source of social order and common sense, but you won’t find many folks in your corner, especially given that a break from strict religious thought helped push the Enlightenment along.

But i did not try to credit Christianity with being the "source" per se...merely the means by which the modern atheist came to know of such things like social order and common sense.

But perhaps you disagree that over the past 2 centuries the majority of Americans did not spend their formative years within walking distance of a Christian church, or having grandparents that were Christians, or pledging allegiance to a nation "under God", or hearing the "golden rule", or learning about Jesus....yes, i am sure there is just an overwhelming majority of atheists in western civilization that look puzzled when you ask them "ever heard of the ten commandments" or "adam and eve"?

Dude, I did not claim that Christianity was the fountainhead so don't argue what is not being argued...all i said is that the Christian tradition is an inescapable foundation for every self-proclaimed atheist....or do you suddenly want to proclaim "Darwin be damned" and dismiss your own belief that environmental influence exists and an individual person possess a magical-supernatural power for free-will?

[_EAllusion]

But perhaps you disagree that over the past 2 centuries the majority of Americans did not spend their formative years within walking distance of a Christian church, or having grandparents that were Christians, or pledging allegiance to a nation "under God", or hearing the "golden rule", or learning about Jesus.

"Under God" was added to the pledge in the mid 1950's after a political campaign by the Knights of Columbus, so maybe Christianity didn't do enough to bless you with a foundation of math.

[_canpakes]

Dude, I did not claim that Christianity was the fountainhead so don't argue what is not being argued...all i said is that the Christian tradition is an inescapable foundation for every self-proclaimed atheist...

There you go, again.

It’s only a foundation if you insist that Christianity was the fountainhead. It wasn’t. If Christianity adopted or incorporated certain general existing sensibilities such as ‘do not kill’ into their own social codex - at least as long as doing so was more convenient than killing, at any particular moment - this does not then follow that atheist attitudes are dependent upon Christian values or beliefs.

But, please, feel free to type out a few more paragraphs of circular reasoning. I’ll go get a coffee while you slap a new post together.

[_subgenius]

But perhaps you disagree that over the past 2 centuries the majority of Americans did not spend their formative years within walking distance of a Christian church, or having grandparents that were Christians, or pledging allegiance to a nation "under God", or hearing the "golden rule", or learning about Jesus.

"Under God" was added to the pledge in the mid 1950's after a political campaign by the Knights of Columbus, so maybe Christianity didn't do enough to bless you with a foundation of math.

Yes, because among the list of examples, the pledge (from late 1890s) is the hinge upon which this whole point pivots - not really a sniper of context are ya?

[_subgenius]

Dude, I did not claim that Christianity was the fountainhead so don't argue what is not being argued...all i said is that the Christian tradition is an inescapable foundation for every self-proclaimed atheist...

There you go, again.

It’s only a foundation if you insist that Christianity was the fountainhead.

No, it is not...that is not how foundations work, ergo the whole difference in claiming something is an "origin" versus claiming it is a "foundation"...they are, in fact, mutually exclusive concepts.

It wasn’t. If Christianity adopted or incorporated certain general existing sensibilities such as ‘do not kill’ into their own social codex - at least as long as doing so was more convenient than killing, at any particular moment - this does not then follow that atheist attitudes are dependent upon Christian values or beliefs.

Unless, the only way an atheist learned of the "sensibility" was through a Christian environment and as filtered by a Christian society.

But, please, feel free to type out a few more paragraphs of circular reasoning. I’ll go get a coffee while you slap a new post together.

Circular is your thing and reasoning is something seemingly foreign to you, so I will keep it simple...apparently even that needs to be dumbed down a bit.

So, lets start slow:

1. Do you agree that something can be a "foundation" for something else without being the "origin"?
2. Are you the product of your environment?

see also previous post wherein:

Dude, I did not claim that Christianity was the fountainhead so don't argue what is not being argued...all i said is that the Christian tradition is an inescapable foundation for every self-proclaimed atheist....or do you suddenly want to proclaim "Darwin be damned" and dismiss your own belief that environmental influence exists and an individual person possess a magical-supernatural power for free-will?

[_canpakes]

1. Do you agree that something can be a "foundation" for something else without being the "origin"?
2. Are you the product of your environment?

see also previous post wherein:
Dude, I did not claim that Christianity was the fountainhead so don't argue what is not being argued...all i said is that the Christian tradition is an inescapable foundation for every self-proclaimed atheist....or do you suddenly want to proclaim "Darwin be damned" and dismiss your own belief that environmental influence exists and an individual person possess a magical-supernatural power for free-will?

Your previous statement in this thread, in regard to atheists, is:

“... they have no other well to draw from.”

Foundation or genesis, that’s still incorrect. Sorry, chap.