I don't like atheists but I sure am obsessed with them.

[onager]

Just been reading That Other Group. Which seems to be turning into A/A Junior.

But the funny thing is, it's not us posting the umpteen links/commentary/BS about atheists. It's the believers (believers in Something, though most of them are pretty shy about what that might be).

I was tempted to start my own personal drinking game using the terms "Silverman" and "CPAC." But I feared for my liver.

The Silverman stuff is easy enough to figure out, I guess. He's just taken over from Richard Dawkins as this week's Atheist Pope.

When will these people figure out we don't HAVE a Pope? Or even an Official Atheist Spokesperson?

Oh, and Silverman holds some suspicious political views. Because as everybody knows, all atheists are required to hold the Official Groupthink Political Positions. As approved by the Party Presidium of the "R" group.

What a load of crap.

Anyway, I find this obsession with us a little...odd. Especially coming from people who also frequently brag that they don't care what atheists think about their beliefs. ("No, I haven't cared about atheists since the first time an atheist disagreed with me. Which happened on a CompuServe chat board on Feb. 23, 1993. At 6:07 PM...&quot

It's starting to remind me of Rev. Ted Haggard, right before the meth-and-rentboy scandal blew up.

Maybe a lot of those people are really Closet Atheists. They just want to be associated with the right kind of atheists. You know, Ideal Atheists who don't exist in the real world. But they're stuck with us Real Atheists and don't like it very much.

[trotsky]

1. I am spared from 95% of that BS thanks to the Ignore feature.

But I can tell you why that one does what he does.

Every criticism of his church hits home big time. He can't dispute any of it, which frustrates him to no end. The only way he thinks he can negate the criticism is to show that not every atheist is a progressive liberal. Now you and I know these items have nothing to do with each other at all. The global institution known as the RCC has no analog whatsoever with any atheist organization, let alone atheists themselves.

But it's all he's got. It's tragically funny, but not worth watching for me anymore. Just a sad pathetic little man driven by impotence and rage.

[skepticscott]

15. He's not the only one like that in there

at least one other deeply frustrated and rage filled Catholic has taken to lashing out at every perceived criticism of the religion he can neither defend nor leave.

As you say, sad and pathetic what religion does to some people.

[mr blur]

27. Of course, I don't know who you mean,

Last edited Mon Mar 31, 2014, 03:08 PM - Edit history (1)

but your words do remind me of someone over there.

[trotsky]

34. Yes of course, I was just speaking in the general sense about a type of believer...

...and not one particular DUer.

But I'm willing to bet $100 that someone (as usual) was monitoring this group looking for violations as usual and alerted on my post. Looks like they didn't get lucky this time. Aww. Impotent rage.

[Act_of_Reparation]

36. Wait. You mean lurkers spy on this forum deliberately looking for violations...

... or to call us out elsewhere?

Sounds a lot like "stalking" to me. >_>

[AlbertCat]

31. Both of these Christian Soldiers love to play a game...

...it's the "I will get the last word in" game. Thus threads go on and on and on and on....

[trotsky]

35. Another reason to use Ignore! n/t

[Heather MC]

2. "Especially coming from people who also frequently brag that they don't care what atheists think....

"Especially coming from people who also frequently brag that they don't care what atheists think about their beliefs."

It's true they don't care that Atheist can present logically reasonably arguments, the can debunk their claims about god, noah, jebus, creation, and so on.

they don't care because truth is not what's important to them. If it was they would be atheist, or at the very least non-theist.

they can't care, to care would mean, they would lose their belief in something with no evidence, err faith

[Warpy]

3. I read that other place but rarely

and usually when somebody has notified me of a food fight.

Most of the atheist haters are doubters. They really want to believe all that Sunday school bullshit because it's comforting to think a big Sky Daddy is going to keep them safe and reward them with their own cloud when they die, but that rational brain keeps nagging in the background that it's all rubbish.

Face it, it's scary as hell to take that flying leap and admit no one is looking out for you and that if you want a better world to live in, it starts with you. People who have jumped off the edge are profoundly frightening to those who have not. We threaten that last little illusion of safety they have and they resent it, since they spend much of their time trying to muffle the doubt.

<plink, plink>

[JNelson6563]

4. I always enjoy your way with words Onager.

I really need to add "Cocktails with Onager" to my bucket list.

More on-topic, I too notice the obsession with atheists in the Other Forum. I don't go there often and post there even less. I only skim the subject lines of some of the back-and-forths and that's about as closely as I can stand to follow the "discussions". That is quite enough to see the raging obsession. Of course we knew that long ago when the obsession spilled here onto our little slice of heaven (as it were). In fact don't they still quote mine here?

Years ago I was fortunate enough to happen upon an obscure forum on the topic of religion. I read so many debates between believers and unbelievers! They were smart and it was pretty high brow. Mind you this was years ago and the internet was not anything like it is today. Anyhow, so I read this stuff, brilliant stuff really, for a long time. It dovetailed nicely with the research I had been doing for a few years up to that point. I participated some but mostly just watched and learned and digested. It aided my journey incredibly and I will forever appreciate that whole being in the right place at the right time thing on that account. So, my point, if you can believe I actually have one, is that those years of really going deep into it, at a much different level, I just exhausted the whole need for debate on that matter then. I find it utterly unappealing, boring, redundant, monotonous...especially when there is so little intellect involved/required. *yawn*

I'd rather look at fine Italian leather on e-bay and find good reasons to splurge now and again.

Julie

[skepticscott]

8. The obsessive attempts among believers There and elsewhere to paint atheism

Last edited Sat Mar 29, 2014, 07:07 PM - Edit history (1)

or science, or skepticism in general, as "religions" is rather ironic, since it seems to imply that so classifying those ways of thinking is to take them down a peg.

I too have read far more intelligent discussion boards on the subject of religion, but I notice everywhere that "liberal" and "progressive" believers don't really even bother trying any more to produce evidence that the god of the bible exists. They want, as much as anything, to at least appear rational about their religion, and they can't do it with that kind of argument any more. So they just skip over that rather important step and just spend their time arguing for the need for "faith" or "spirituality" some such, or they morph their "god" into whatever form they think will render it immune from critical examination by people whose respect they desperately want to keep.

And yes..cocktails with atheists are grand

[JNelson6563]

13. Hear, hear!

[skepticscott]

14. Was that for the cocktail part

or the unimportant rest of my post?

[JNelson6563]

17. All of it my dear!

But of course, especially the cocktail part! I really look forward to seeing you & Mrs. Skeptic again!

Julie

[skepticscott]

22. We're looking forward to it as well!

Look for us at Memorial Day!

[edhopper]

25. I have been told there repeatedly

that there can be no evidence for God. Of course this necessitates a God that has never interacted with the physical Universe, but somehow I have never gotten a real response to that point.

It's better just to post badly reasoned articles about why atheists are doo-doo heads.

[skepticscott]

26. Yes, at least one

rather clueless poster thinks that if they argue that "god" can't be "disproved" that it balances out the fact that convincing evidence for the existence of the Christian god is sadly lacking. They have a deep misunderstanding of how real things are demonstrated.

[edhopper]

30. Yeah

because God can be defined as so vague that there is nothing to dispute.So atheists are wrong to affirm there is no God.
On the other hand, this self identified agnostic has no problem with the very specific God that believers proclaim.

[AlbertCat]

32. to take them down a peg.

I love how many who poo-poo science like to try to win their lame debunking arguments by framing them like....science! They like to make their fairytales sound like science, they use "studies" and "experts" and all manner of scientific jargon to lend credibility to their fantasies....completely unaware of the irony.

[onager]

16. I had one of those forums too, JNelson!

One of the old Salon forums, long gone.

As time went on, it became obvious that the forum had a majority of atheists and agnostics. But we also had quite a few religious people - Xians, observant Jews, Muslims. It was an incredibly diverse bunch with a lot of life experience. As you said, it "aided my journey incredibly."

Whenever some idiot - usually me - complained about what THEY (believers) were up to out in the Real World, somebody was sure to correct me: "HEY! You talk to me in here nearly every day. And I'm not like that, am I? So please don't generalize about us."

That was a good lesson to learn, though I still forget it sometimes.

I still remember one of my favorite questions/answers. Somebody asked: "What should I call a trans person?" The immediate response: "My name will do just fine, thanks."

Damned if I know what the difference is today. I guess on that board we sort of got to know each other before we went diving into the Deep Stuff about religion. So we already had some mutual respect and affection. I still remember the morning of 9/11. Many of our posters lived in NYC and we were all anxious as people logged in, wondering if anybody was missing.

Being optimistic and not too bright, I guess I expected the same sort of thing in the "R" group. Lesson learned! I do get the same sort of feeling from this group. I can agree to disagree with people in here and they don't seem to take it personally or hold a grudge.

This group having cocktails together is a great idea! BTW, my version of your fine Italian leather is my Weird Hobby, building scale models. Which I've been doing all day, without a single thought about religion or the lack of it.

[LostOne4Ever]

5. I posted the notary thing over there

And I expected to get a few replies and a lot of "that notary is a bigot."

Instead, I get people trying to blame the victims. I was honestly shocked. They started by attacking silverman (who I admit to not being a big fan of myself). Accusing him of making the whole thing up and being a publicity seeker. Thing is, and which I pointed out, he did not DO anything. Literally, all he did was witness the events.

Even if you are biased against libertarians, the whole story was from Amanda Knief (who statistically speaking is most likely a liberal). There is no reason to be suspicious of her at all.

Further, if I were going to fabricated a story, I would have made the notary more flagrant

They just want to be associated with the right kind of atheists. You know, Ideal Atheists who don't exist in the real world. But they're stuck with us Real Atheists and don't like it very much.

Got to disagree here. If this was the case they would not push the idea that an agnostic is some sort of middle position to an atheist and theist fallacy.

If anything its the other way around. They have some sort of straw-atheist stereotype in their minds and are desperate not to be associated with it in any way. If asked about it they pretty much admit as much. They don't want to be associated with what amounts to an exaggerated vision of Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens.

Visions that are not based in reality but upon their own stereotypes. I have not followed either man but I know for a fact that Dawkins never claimed he could disprove god like is being claimed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218120330

And that Hitchens never claimed that if religion went away that so would all the ills of the world:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218102210

Yet they have no issue pushing such views because it sounds like something THEY THINK DAWKINS OR HITCHENS would say.

Similarly, in that dumb interview with Niel Degrasse Tyson he does the same thing when he says he does not want to be associate with...emmm...what he calls "atheist behavior."

No matter how much he wants to deny it, he does not believe in any deities....that makes him an implicit atheist. Rather than realizing that, and then re-evaluating his views of atheists based on evidence, he rejects the idea of being an atheist.

[trotsky]

6. I would like to frame your post and hang it on the wall in the Religion group.

Yet they have no issue pushing such views because it sounds like something THEY THINK DAWKINS OR HITCHENS would say.

Could not have put it any better.

[Iggo]

7. We don't have a leader and we don't have rules and that makes them nervous.

[AtheistCrusader]

19. That's exactly it.

Well, that, and the fact that we don't have institutionalized dogma that says things like 'homosexuality is a sin'.

I think it really bugs them that they can't shake that. That's why they get all excited and frothy whenever they come up with an example of a anti-gay bigot that happens to also be an atheist. They think they can use it as a 'you do it too' shield.

Because they fundamentally misunderstand atheism.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. I pulled the rug out from under that group and all the

endless posts about atheist this and atheist that just about vanished.

[Iggo]

10. That forum moves a lot slower now, don't it.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. Actually it is a much better experience.

[Iggo]

12. Most definitely.

[AtheistCrusader]

20. +1

There are only two people on my ignore list, and putting them there has radically altered that forum.

[Iggo]

24. Amen, brother.

[AtheistCrusader]

18. They post every tiny shred of anything even potentially negative about any individual atheist

they can find, because they think it covers up the stench and the horror, and the murder, and the bigotry, and the misandry, and the homophobia that is built into their entire faith at the core.

They think that since they can maybe sometimes find an atheist that might happen to be some sort of bigot, that excuses the HEAP OF SHIT their faith was built on, shit that is institutionalized IN their faith.

[AtheistCrusader]

21. Also, American Atheists boasts a whole 2,200 members on their wiki page.

Yet Silverman gets introduced as somehow America's leading atheist because he runs that org.

2,200 people.

Some 5-9% of the country are atheists, ignoring other types of non-theist, and they can't even fill a fucking baseball stadium, and that somehow still lends Silverman credence as 'Americas top atheist'?

Fucking idiots.

[TxDemChem]

23. I just avoid that group completely.

This is the one place where we all are of one mind when it comes to politics, but not necessarily religion. I try to only deal with them in GD and where religion is a no-no.

I get enough shit just living in Texas.

[Heddi]

28. Remember, folks, there is a place you can go, and we DON'T count up your replies to other members

You can speak freely and openly. And we don't chastise you for having people on ignore. We don't count up your replies to other posters and use them against you. We don't insult you for your lack of beliefs.

I am the administrator, and I have control over members. Meaning, all who show interest aren't necessarily given permission to join.

PM me for more information

[Goblinmonger]

29. Oh, she's an iron-fisted tyrant

[Manifestor_of_Light]

33. There are two people that argue with me.

They are "xtians" but won't tell me what they believe.

I say "Do you believe in original sin and substitutionary atonement?
Those are the first principles of xtianity.

Answers:
"Never heard of original sin. Substitutionary atonement? What's that?"