ANSWERS: 44
  • Yawn... Too lazy. Why make things more complicated than they have to be. Yes, I am an atheist. Could use ACE (after common era) and BCE (before common era) rather than adbc.
  • Fireballish's answer is the easiest. What you propose is completely impractical for anyone, regardless of religious belief. To express a neutral stance in writing, athiests or overly-unbiased authors use BCE and CE (before common era and common era) instead of BC and AD. And for the record, AD doesn't stand for "after death." It's Latin (?) for something for which I don't presently recall.
  • Im an atheist but I do beleive that Jesus Christ lived and was a good man. I dont care what calendar we use and I certainly wont lose any sleep at having to celebrate the life of Christ. I enjoy celebrating Xmas. OK mainly for the presents but I think people believing in God makes that a special time of the year. If we did not use BC or AD whats the alternative. Its part of our way of life now. Besides we might open ourselves up for another Y2K type problem. Many Muslim countries dont use BC and AD of christ but instead use Mohammeds (Brith or death - sorry not sure which one). I would ahve no problem with using that, except I am use to the dates I know and would have to re-learn them all or have to keep converting. So lets keep it as it is.
  • 1) Well, time passes, no matter what you call it, and a lot of people couldn't care less (*raises hand*). No one argues that Christianity has been a powerful force among people, including the people who wrote the current calendar. But really, you don't have to take something seriously to live alongside it in your daily life. For instance, I don't believe in Count Chocula, but I fricking love the cereal that His Excellency inspired. Dig? 2) Actually, we HAVE changed that, and anyone of consequence now refers to "BCE" and "CE" (before the common era, and common era). 3) AD doesn't mean "after death" - I'll let you look that one up on your own. 4) ok: for the record, I don't really eat Count Chocula. I just wanted to give the "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" argument a bit of a rest.
  • I'm not concerned about it. I think it is convenient to have a standard calendar just so we have a way to measure when things happened or are scheduled to happen. Incidentally, I am seeing many more documents using "BCE" instead of BC - "Before Christian Era" or "Before Common Era"; and CE instead of AD. To me, these things are transitory and not worth worrying about. Besides, if we started from 0 at the time homo sapiens showed up, writing the year wouldn't be as easy as a 4 digit number.
  • a.d. means "ano domini"-in the year of our lord, not after the death of christ. It is now politically correct and more common for people to use BCE and CE, before common era and common era.
  • Today is January 29, 2007 C.E. I think that sits fine. An atheist is not someone you should worry about. Too much worry over that. Most hated demographic group in America? Why? No good reason for that either. Like any other under acknowledged and berated group in our history, Atheists are just not going to remain closeted any more, and shouldn't. Only a few decades back women in America didn't speak up much, as it was "their place" to "be seen and not heard" deferring all decision making to the men. Whether women, African Americans descended from slaves, homosexuals, or any immigrant group, ... or atheists...shouldn't matter. Just accept them and move on. Do that, and they'll stop bitchin and moanin for acceptance. Atheists just have to speak up now. I'm tired of it, and I'm not going to take it any more, is sort of how it goes! Should have expected that! Who cares about the calendar anyway! I like the CE, and BCE bit, as it shifts the emphasis off of one particular religious belief system having an anchor or baseline credibility in our culture. I acknowledge that there have historically been a lot of Christians in America for the last couple hundred years, but that doesn't make them any more credible than anybody else. Also isn't accurate to say that all framers of our US Constitution, or the various stakeholders and participants in the making of America were Christian. Anyway, I acknowledge that given historical world events, the calendar is what it is. Why go to the trouble to change it! Besides, not gonna happen. Now as an atheist, I'd say that it's much easier to accommodate everybody in our society by removing the "In God We Trust" from our currency. It wasn't there long ago, why should it be there now? And it's an easy fix. Put there to simply appease a few religionists? Not ever a good idea to mix what should be a secular (everyone/common) concern with what is a religious (private) concern. Currency is a "common/state/federal/secular" concern, not a private religious one. Why would religious people want that on our money anyway. Is not a focus on money a contradiction to religious/Christian teachings? Let us just focus on little things, and things that we CAN do to accommodate everyone. CE, CBE are an easy fix. Removing the In God We Trust from currency should be an easy thing. Returning to the pre-"under God" reference in our Pledge should be an easy fix too, but somehow many folks feel insulted. That wasn't there till the 50's, and historically should have remained as was written originally. It was only changed as a measure of intolerance and fear. Now, should intolerance and fear really be what Americans are known for? Is that really what we’re all about? Saltydogg
  • Calendar time is arbitrary and a matter of societal agreement. That is all it can be. It has no religious significance for most people.
  • Ok. NO candy coating. No god created Man, Man created God. REligion was created as a means of controlling the masses, like you and me. Marx at least had that one right. No reference to God, any god, or any diety, not a flying teapot, nor any dreamed up devine object or idea whould ever creep into law, or be allowed to work its way into secular life, or into anything that affects ALL. What is religious should always be kept private and off of the shoulders of the average citizen. NO one, and no religion has the right to make someone feel guilty for not believing. To tell a child otherwise is nothing short of child abuse. Therefore, the bulk of Christians are child abusers. Love and religion are not the same. Control and religion are. Children have a right to be listened to, and to express their opinion, within limits. And religion is NOT off limits. You place religion way up there on a pedistal, and it will eventually fall. Religious zealots have created this mess by imposing their views on others, and ramming their views down the throats of others, into legislation, thus showing no respect for the rights of others. Is it any wonder that atheists are upset? I think not. Might as well be the slaves of the new millenium. IT is the zealots that abuse others, not the atheists. It's the theists that declare wars, not the atheists. Keep religion to yourself, and let the kids choose what they believe and they won't poo poo your religion maybe. Maybe you could teach them to believe in people first! Maybe you could demonstrate the concept of "fairness" that we teach them (but don't practice) in preschool. But force religion upon them, they will rebel, and should. Mutual respect has to start somewhere. And respect is not the same as blind obedience or unquestioning compliance. Make your religions less coersive and maybe some folks won't bitch and moan about them. Just perhaps people would want to check it out, and you won't find your attendance declining. YOu theists don't know if anything you profess is true, any more than an atheist can prove that it isn't. Burden of proof is not on the atheist. Leave them alone. Get off your high horse and just see folks as people, not atheist or otherwise. Do that, and maybe the kids and young adults will be less militant or loud about their objections.
  • We have B.C.E. and C.E. for a reason now.
  • Castrate: Why so bitter? Shouldn't what is secular be a common ground for all, in the interest of peace? You seem a bit opinionated here. Sometimes I wonder if some folks shouldn't have a double dose of prune juice fo breakfast instead of te hypocrite sandwich or a bowl of Biased Rant. Perhaps being more "regular" would impove their disposition! Try to see the logic in it. I only suggested that the common ground should be the focus of that which is secular. Never did I suggest that we should take away anybody's right to worship if/when/how they want. I just want my own right not to! Have nice day.
  • I really don't give a crap. Most atheists don't deny the existence of Christ, so I would think most feel the same way I do.
  • We also use CE-common era.
  • If Athiests dont believe in anything then how can they believe they are Athiests
  • If a person just does not believe in a supreme divine being, then what the calendar date is based on should have no relevance to them ... it would only bother someone who was totally against Christ, and refused to acknowledge a calendar based on his life & death, not a mere nonbeliever. They could always just pick an event with some sort of significance to them and call that "time starts here", then use a simple calendar conversion formula, in a similar way to the various other calendars out there ... Jewish, Chinese, Mayan, Egyptian, even "Star Trek" using "Star Date" have all picked a different starting point, but time itself is the same all over the Earth, so calendar conversions are always fairly simple.
  • AB and this rating system only lends credence to a recent poll which determined that Atheists are the most hated group in America. I espouse a live and let live-don't force religion upon people-atitude, and I m downrated. IF I had taken a stance that was counter to our own Constitution, I would have likely been better rated here I believe. I'm pretty much done with the AB community, if this is representative of it.
  • I h ave no issue with the calendar dating method, it's just an arbitary collection of letters really isn't it. Whether or not I believe in God, Jesus Christ, true or real, etc, was a hugely significant event in the history of the human kind, and it's fairly reasonable to use historical methods like this to map out time and other events.
  • I personally always have sought other methods of calculating "time". When I was younger, I counted the moons that have passed since my day of birth, including leap years . . . I feel stuck using a "religious based" calendar and would love to know of any pagen/atheist/non-religious/scientific methods of calculating time that I can implement in my day to day business affairs.Thanks for the BCE - I never got the memo! I still have to fight for people and friends to respect the fact I prefer not the be in the presence of a christmas tree this time of year-eesch!
  • One of the very, very few things that I actually credit Christianity for is it's organization of time. However, I don't use BC and AD, I use BCE and CE.
  • Not all countries follow BC AD, some follow by periods
  • I guess they use BCE & CE, right?
  • It's a way to measure time, why should I care? We need something to firmly set significant events, even if it is the false death of some false god.
  • the more logical, and right way is BCE Before Common Era. It's more consistant with a real timeline.
  • yes im an athiest, and i dont really care about BC and AD, anyway we use BCE and CE now.
  • Since atheists tend to be very practical people, most would not be in favor of going through the enormous and unnecessary hassle of ditching the system that has worked just fine for almost 2,000 years. But "what do they think of time?" is a good question to pose to many religionists and creationists who keep trying to ignore the proven age of the Earth (at least 4.6 billions years) by insisting that the biblical claims of a 6,000 year old world are accurate.
  • I do check in now and then, when I get notifications of comments. Appreciated. However I find that in general, people are more likely to share or comment if they have a negative comment, or if they can finish it with some derogatory gesture. I don't find this surprising, however disappointing and representative of many humans I've met in my lifetime. Sad. Thanks for the comment.
  • Castrate, This thread may be over a year old, but don't think that means Atheists have gone away! Nor have I. As for the young folks being the ones complaining, well listen harder? Maybe you need to think it thru again! (think this time) I think you're all wet. The young (as well as many of the not so young, maybe even you too!) simply mimick what they hear and fail to reason things out or to think critically. Rather than thinking productively and critically they only think too quickly and critically. A classroom teacher for example can predict fairly accurately what room parents are thinking in terms of an election by what their kids say in class. The kids mimick what they hear. In spite of rebelling a bit at some stages, over some things, kids will many times mimick what they hear their parents say. Also, I believe it to be true that kids' views are either the same as their folks' views, or (because they sometimes react in the extreme) they are the exact opposite. I think that kids don't just modify their parents' beliefs, but more often either go along with their parents belief system, or do a flip flop to the opposite side. This in mind, many kids are repeating what they hear at home! THIS MEANS many hear the words reflecting the thoughts of upset atheist parents at home! Those who are going the exact opposite of their parents are doing so (most likely) because their parents have become evangelistic non-thinking too judgemental hypocrites! Parents who are judgemental of others, and who adhere to a system that just makes no sense (like our not-so-intelligent-commander-and-thief), and justify misbehavior for example with scripture, are just asking to be outsmarted by the/their young! So, you see I think that you're all wet. It isn't the young mostly that are doing the squeeking. Depending upon the country, anywhere from about 12% to over 50% of the population are atheist, or think that church has littleor no place in their life. And as for the "little" things vs. the "big" things, any time people are not left to believe as they wish, there are no little things! If you really think that it's ok for religious belief to creep into our secular lives, and for one group to force their views on others, move to the middle east. There, you're not allowed to even have a bible...illegal. Is that what you want here? Extremism? There is far too much extremism in the world, and we've seen too much here in recent years. Get it thru your head that everything we do to prevent it is no "little" thing.
  • I think the vast majority realise that time is not a religious phenomenon, and that dating systems are arbitrary and unimportant. Of that majority, perhaps a majority among them will also realise that the BC/AD system of dating is culturally defined and not used by everyone in the world. Furthermore, there 'is' a new system to replace the BC/AD one; BCE and CE (Before Common Era, Common Era). 'Also'... AD stands for ano domini; in the year of our lord, not 'after death'.
  • It doesn't bother me at all. I wonder if believers are bothered by the pagan names of the days of the week and the names of the months.
  • It's arbitrary. I could care less, but I though it's accuracy was dubious (in regard to the 0 year, I think).
  • I have been wondering this same thing, I was going to ask this question but I didn't want to duplicate the question. So I am just posting this answer to bring it back up. To me I look in the mirror at myself and I look at my children and birds, clouds,trees, rain, everything in this world that someone had to create and I find it impossible not to believe in God. I don't see how anybody can not believe ina creator, how do they think we or everything else came to be without God?
  • It's as good a reference point as any, and why change all the calendars?
  • Actually a lot of people (historians and the like) are using CE and BCE, and higher level history courses are teaching this as well. But while the old system was irritating it really wasn't a big deal; it's just a way of gauging time. Most people don't even know what BC and AD even stand for. I don't even remember what they stand for, because they're not really that important anyway. I think CE and BCE is easier, because it's easier to get and probably more apt as well as less irritating. And we do need some kind of division because no one wants to be saying it's December 13, Several Billion and Some Odd Years. Either way it's just a convenient way to keep track of the date.
  • A.D. stands for anno domini which means "in the year of our Lord" in Latin. . You use BC and AD, I use BCE and CE. "Before Common Era" and "Common Era".
  • Ummm.... BC means Before Christ - as in BIRTH not DEATH of the same. Ya might try on some facts - they don't hurt ya know. :-) Anyway, that's a US convention. In the UK they say BCE (before the common era)and CE (Common Era). . And as for using the supposed birth of a mythical character - who cares? Gotta start someplace.
  • Atheists probably are no more bothered by this originally arbitrary way of marking time than Christian believers are bothered by the fact that our days of the week and some of the months are named after Pagan deities. This has probably been pointed out to you, but AD does not stand for "after death." It stands for anno domini (year of our lord).
  • The BC and AD are just convenient measuring tools for time created, like religion and the idea of God, by people.
  • No, but christmas is full of pagan traditions that have nothing to do with christianity but have been quite accepted. I don't think many atheists are going to care what number you assign a year, as long as you come to his/her wedding on the right one.
  • In some ways I think a different way of looking at time would be useful, especially when you are studying ancient history. Counting backwards is annoying. Maybe we should set the clock back another 10,000 years, then we would be living in the year 12009 and we could re-date all BC years with easier to understand dates. Seriously though, you could ask the same of Muslims and all the other cultures with their own timescales that the Christian BC/AD has usurped. Like Microsoft, not everyone agrees with it and lots think it has its flaws but it is what most of us are familiar with using and it is what most people used so if you want to relate to others, it is what you use.
  • Nobody really knows when the universe began and I believe it never did begin. it's always been here. So...are we going to rememebr it's year 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000025? Imagine having to write that out on a check.
  • I don't really think about it. Its the system that was in place long before I was born and it is likely to be the system in place long after I am gone. - I wonder how Christians feel living their lives in days and months named after ancient gods.
  • It seems to be the accepted standard. Just as Thor's-day is the accepted standard for the day before Friday.
  • In the US it's Before Christ - in the UK it's Before the Common Era (BCE) It's not time you're talking about, just a label. And it's not the death of Christ the BC refers too, but his supposed birth.
  • There are other calendars besides the Gregorian one. This is Year 4716 on the Chinese calendar for example. It is also Year 5778 on the Jewish calendar. We also have BCE (Before Common Era) and CE (Common Era)designations, rather than BC (Before Christ) or AD (Anno Domini = Year of our Lord). Theree have been many calendar systems.

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy