Ok, wow!

[JNelson6563]

I often hear about the brawls in the Religion forum here in AA. Sometimes I follow links you guys post here, read the "discussions" and rarely comment.

Well lately I've been catching more of the articles in Religion as all new posts show up on the latest page. I often click on them without noticing which forum/group it takes me too.

Well I've gotten involved in a discussion or two and once again I am all "I don't know how you guys do it". It's madness! Some there think they are very clever when I find them to be anything but. It's laughable really, how they try this or that "clever" obfuscation. I marvel at the intellectual dishonesty.

If that forum represents the believers on our side, we're in trouble.

Julie

[Warpy]

1. Belief itself is irrational since it must occur with an absence of facts

The struggle to portray it as reasonable and rational is usually pretty funny--for a while.

The believers feel it necessary to surround it with the trappings of rational discourse because they hate being reminded that it is not rational, at all. "It's LOGICAL! I've heard it all my life!"

Mostly such discussions are pointless, the atheist doing the equivalent of taking a binkie away from a two year old. Belief keeps them feeling safe when the world is falling apart around them. It's useful to them.

Were believers able to embrace the irrationality of their system of belief, though, we'd have nothing to talk about. It's only when they try to persuade others that their system of belief is perfectly reasonable and logical that they run into serious trouble.

[trotsky]

2. I love the threats, too.

As in (paraphrasing of course), "You atheists need to be nice to Christians or you won't get our support for the progressive agenda."

Really? Your support for the progressive agenda is so weak you'll be dissuaded by the comments of atheists on an anonymous Internet message board?

[Starboard Tack]

5. I'd love to see your links to those "threats"

Got a link to anything resembling this?
"You atheists need to be nice to Christians or you won't get our support for the progressive agenda."

[trotsky]

7. Why, that would be calling someone out.

And that is expressly not allowed. Surely you know that.

[Starboard Tack]

16. Nice dodge.

So your accusations are baseless. I thought so.

[trotsky]

42. You can believe whatever you want.

I've seen enough of your behavior to know what you're all about.

[rexcat]

8. Threats????

Your cognitive dissonance is remarkable and for the record I truly find, at times, your comments on the annoying side.

This is DU. If you don't like frank and open discussions that can lead to disagreement you are on the wrong web site!

[Starboard Tack]

17. Talk to trotsky. He is the one talking about threats.

I'm glad you find my posts annoying. I wish I could say the same for your posts, but annoying would be way too complimentary. Mine are meant to annoy those who enjoy mockery and embrace intolerance.

[rexcat]

36. Is that a call out?

and for your comment

Mine are meant to annoy those who enjoy mockery and embrace intolerance.

what drivel!

[Starboard Tack]

37. No call out. Not my style.

You were asking about "Threats". I was not the one who mentioned threats except in response to trotsky, who brought the subject up. I'm sorry if you think I talk drivel, but you don't have to read my posts or respond. In fact, I would prefer you didn't respond unless you have something constructive to add to the conversation.

[rexcat]

41. That is a two way street...

sweet heart.

[laconicsax]

12. Nailed it.

Anyone who withholds support for progressive causes because of what atheists say about religion can go fuck themselves.

It's almost as bad as when, post-election, someone blames atheists for a loss because we didn't shut up about our "petty concerns."

[mr blur]

3. Yeah, but you have to keep an eye on the Crazies nt

Last edited Tue Jun 12, 2012, 06:19 PM - Edit history (1)

[laconicsax]

11. Can you edit to remove the call-out?

Let's try to avoid making accusations of people who are blocked from this group.

[mr blur]

28. Of course. Sorry.

[laconicsax]

30. Thanks.

[Starboard Tack]

18. Nice manners there Mr. Blur

Calling out a blocked member is extremely rude.

[Goblinmonger]

21. When you tell this story to your friends,

and I'm sure you will, make sure you point out the fact that a host brought the call out up first.

[Starboard Tack]

40. I just noticed that and a good move by LaconicSax

I honestly did not see her post and have not, nor do I intend to discuss any of this with "my friends". I am aware that some might think otherwise, but I speak entirely for myself here. I might also add that, yes I do have a number of friends IRL, who are also members of DU. Some of them post in this corner of DU, some don't. We all have different views on religion and faith. I believe (LOL) that I am the only one who declares himself atheist and all the others claim their own separate flavors. I don't question them on that, but we all are liberal progressives who want Obama reelected and we all want a total separation of church and state. That's enough for me.

[awoke_in_2003]

26. yet in post 5....

you are asking another member to do the same thing.

[Starboard Tack]

4. I know what you mean.

I feel the same way about some of my fellow atheists. If they represent the non-believers on our side, we are in serious trouble.

[laconicsax]

10. How do you mean that?

[Starboard Tack]

19. How do I mean that?

I don't feel represented the handful of mocking atheists, who like to mine the internet to find the most outrageous fundie flame bait and then spam the religion group with it, in the hope of getting a rise out of our fellow DUers who are theists. I find it insulting to all of us, believers and non-believers, that anyone would engage in such ugly, spiteful and puerile behavior. What do you think? Do you endorse that kind of behavior?

[dmallind]

20. Never seen you complain about that being done to atheists though. Strange, that.

[Starboard Tack]

25. Maybe I missed those occasions.

Feel free to supply me with some links and I'll jump right on it. I admit that I don't read every thread or post here or in Religion, but I usually call bigotry or intolerance wherever I see it. So, links please.

[dmallind]

45. ...

Oh you have me on the carpet here. I'm all over the floor like a cheap.......mat.

[Starboard Tack]

46. Maybe I missed something else, but if I made you laugh, then all is good.

I do like your post on "How to sell liberal christianity". Excellent question and quite a dilemma. I wonder, though, if anything of real value needs to be sold. Selling beliefs inevitably cheapens them. Surely, it is better to encourage awareness in the hope that people eventually arrive under their own steam.

[laconicsax]

22. I don't see that.

I think I know what you're seeing but it isn't "the most outrageous fundie flame bait" or spamming "in the hope of getting a rise out of our fellow DUers."

Have you considered the possible that what you consider "the most outrageous fundie flame bait" are mainstream news stories about issues relevant to the group and that one certainly doesn't have to "mine the Internet" to find them?

[Starboard Tack]

23. Apparently, you don't see it, which I find even more disappointing.

Do you really think that posting hate speech by people like Hagee and Phelps is representative of any fellow DUers? Of course not, but if any person of faith dares to speak to that, they immediately get tarred with the same extremist brush by these mockers and haters. If anyone like myself, who declares themselves a tolerant non-believer, we are attacked as apologists of every crime ever committed in the name of religion. It's not about agreeing with the beliefs or even the believers ideas. It's about civilized discourse and tolerance. Why stoop to the same depths of anti-social behavior as those we despise, to score points among our friends at DU? Do you really enjoy that? I don't, and I'm not the only one who doesn't.
The fact that these stories are mainstream, doesn't mean they have to be dragged incessantly into discussions here. Nobody here supports those assholes. There are many lively conversations to be had that actually concern our members. Several are struggling with their beliefs and lack of beliefs and this is a great place to come for support, but it isn't, or shouldn't be a training camp for baiting fellow DUers.

[Goblinmonger]

24. Don't mean to tag-team, but here's my thoughts.

The problem is that so many theists go to Religion and talk about how religion isn't bad and is really, really awesome and they give some isolated example of that awesomeness. Then everyone pats them on the back and confirms how awesome religion is and wonders why atheists should have a problem with it in the government. The stories of those that people don't agree with are necessary to show those people that there are plenty of problems with religion and that the hand-holding awesomeness is not representative of the majority of religious in this country. Some people in Religion don't even really have exposure to the bad-side of religion according to what they voice in the group. Heck, even you talk about never having seen a negative impact to being an out atheists in your life which is markedly different than many experiences of many atheists in here, myself included.

[Starboard Tack]

29. No problem. I agree with everything you say.

And I accept that my own experience has not been a harrowing one. I am fortunate in that regard, but I truly feel for those who have been victimized by intolerant fundamentalism. I have friends and family who continue to be willingly victimized, though they don't see it that way. Of course, our theists DU friends should be confronted and challenged when they don't support the separation of church and state, which I do IRL, when engaging with friends.
All that is fine. What is not fine, for me, is the constant sophomoric baiting and ridiculing. I think we can do better than that. I have read several of your posts and know that you can engage in respectful, intelligent discussions without describing believers as delusional freaks, or irrational apologists for the inquisition. I just think that we would gain more respect if we show respect.
I fear that some victims of abuse often become abusers themselves and they are in need of our support and positive help, not negative reinforcement. I'll be happy to discuss this further with you via PM. Let me know.

[laconicsax]

27. If we ignore what the RW nutjobs are doing, we have zero chance at stopping them.

I'm not in favor of staying silent about the actions of a significant number of people who wield political power that is disproportionately large compared to their numbers. Furthermore, if we intentionally stay silent about them because knowledge of their actions may upset a few people, then we are complicit in those actions.

BTW: Who is claiming that Hagee and Phelps are representative of DUers?

[Starboard Tack]

38. I am in total agreement with your first paragraph

I think everyone at DU, without exception, finds the RW nutjobs, including Hagee and Phelps, to be abhorrent. Nobody here stands for the kind of bigotry and hatred they spew. So far, we are on the same page. I start having a problem when our liberal progressive theist brethren are blamed for the sins of extremists who claim the same faith. Dragging them into that cesspool is uncalled for. To turn one's anger at fundamentalist extremists onto our political comrades will not lead us on any constructive path to deal with a common enemy. It's very important to recognize one's friends and not judge them because they appear to embrace the same beliefs as some very evil people. We should find common ground and ways to combat a common enemy, instead of beating each other up, which is rather silly IMO.

[trotsky]

43. "when our liberal progressive theist brethren are blamed for the sins of extremists"

Last edited Wed Jun 13, 2012, 08:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Where does this happen? Please link to specific posts. You demand this from others when they make claims; surely you will hold yourself to the same standard, right?

On edit: I believe this is just further proof that bolsters my theory - namely, that you have this strange caricature or straw man atheist you hate, and you're confusing people on DU with that caricature. Just like the most recent time you lashed out and attacked me, only to have to retract and apologize after I showed you I never said what you accused me of.

[Curmudgeoness]

33. I also am discouraged at times with the rivalry

between theists and atheists....and the way it often degenerates to the lowest common denominator. I wish it didn't have to get hateful and I see a lot of that from both sides. I don't like seeing it here and I often stop reading threads when it gets vile.

But I also know why atheists get so upset. We are a minority, we seem to be the ones who are always "in the wrong" whenever things get ugly (even when that is not true), and we have to keep working to protect/defend separation of church and state. The government is making every effort to institute a state religion (Christianity), our politicians are measured by their faith, and theists consider themselves the "chosen ones". We have to defend ourselves. But I do hope that it can be done in a civil manner...but I don't see that happening.

[Starboard Tack]

39. I agree. That's why we must work together.

I haven't encountered any atheist haters here, just a lot of silly fights that get us nowhere. We, all of us, have some serious enemies out there. What we atheists, agnostics and other various non-believers need to do is reach out to our liberal progressive theist friends on DU and work together, by discussing how we can take religion out of politics and government. That is a common goal. Beyond that, we should not be concerned with any individual's personal beliefs, if they do not effect us negatively. If all we display is anger, instead of tolerance, then we feed the unholy beast and make no headway.
Each one of us must decide how civil we want to be. I have noticed, of late, that some of our less civil posters are receiving less and less attention, which is a good indicator of the direction most would prefer to take.
Let's face it, we are not going to get religion out of our schools and public institutions without the help of progressive believers.

[Starboard Tack]

6. "I often click on them without noticing which forum/group it takes me too. "

It does get quite dizzying around here at times, I must say.

[laconicsax]

9. I wouldn't say that it represents believers "on our side."

I don't know if you've seen many church-state separation threads, but the fact that a fair number of DU theists oppose enforcement of that part of the Constitution, either explicitly or implicitly, clearly indicates (to me) that they aren't "on our side."

[2ndAmForComputers]

13. There's a number of them I just CAN'T picture punching the (D) in the voting booth.

When there's a big fat juicy tasty (R) right next to it that agrees with EVERY... FUCKING... THING... in their worldview.

But if I had the hubris of naming names, I would lack humility. And that would be a bummer.

[laconicsax]

14. I'll name one who was PPR'd.

You recall Kurmudgeon, right? They were a prime example of what you're saying.

[Curmudgeoness]

32. I cringed every time I saw that name.

I always worried that someone would make a link to me----oh no! Glad I don't have to worry about it anymore.

[laconicsax]

34. I always thought it was funny that you two were such polar opposites. n/t

[Curmudgeoness]

35. Best complement I have had all year.

[2ndAmForComputers]

44. Non-religion example in Meta right now. If you know what I mean.

[Ninjaneer]

15. I'm with you.

I left the forum for almost a year recently. It absolutely BLEW my mind to see the exact same conversations taking place in Religion when I came back. The same idiots spouting the same garbage that's been refuted a billion times.

I marvel at the patience of some who go into the Religion forum. I try to stay away as the dumbfuckery just raises my blood pressure and leave the debates to better men (and women) than I.

[dimbear]

31. The second in my series on mockers: Martin Luther

Noted mocker, filled his writings with mockery both for good and for evil.

“The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn" Luther

Mockery is one of the time honored tools of religious dispute. Do not discard it.

Coming up: George Carlin, Sigmund Freud, Mark Twain, and so on til I get bored.

[Plantaganet]

47. Yeah.

I had a couple of skirmishes in there. It confirmed my worst suspicions. Progressive theists base everything on how they feel about religion and, by extension, how you're supposed to feel about religion - "My imaginary friend really likes you now!"

But practical questions go unanswered or are never even acknowledged.

1. Exactly how much of that collection money is being used to strip my family and friends of their rights?
2. Honestly, what makes any well-established faith all that different from Scientology or Mormonism?
3. What is it that makes someone truly "Christian?"

Argument can be enjoyable... but only if it's leading toward a solution or a greater truth. Ultimately it's pointless to venture into discussion with religious people. And, honestly, I'd rather be watching Blake's 7!

[trotsky]

48. "what makes any well-established faith all that different from Scientology or Mormonism"

Just had another "discussion" about that. Always hilarious to watch them squirm. Did it lead to a solution or greater truth? Naw, but it was entertaining.

[Plantaganet]

49. Ha!

Well, to be fair, Blake's 7 is pretty entertaining, too!

Keep fighting the good fight, brother.