An open letter to DU atheists from a spiritual (not religious) soul:

[108blessings]

Thank you to the respectful atheists whose have posted comments that do not mock those of us who "believe," nor try to force their opinions on us. They have the right attitude. After all, one of the most common beefs on DU by some atheists (that I have seen in my short time of reading posts here) is directed at Christians and involves the stuffing of their views down society's collective throat. And yet these same atheists have no qualms about hijacking threads (relating to specific beliefs/ideas where the OP is not really asking whether something is true, but wanting feedback on those who hold the same tenets) and stating absolutes like "it's a fairytale." As if they know!

Here is a quote from a SCIENTIST (and these scornful atheist types LOVE science) named Albert Einstein. Ever heard of him?


"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed"

Amen.

[enlightenment]

1. You know, 108, I'm one of those "respectful" atheists -

I choose not to engage with believers 99% of the time. It's not worth it to me.

But I have to reply to you, because your post is disdainful and rude - in much the same manner as those you criticise.

If you're trying to start something, you may have succeeded.




edited for spelling

[108blessings]

2. How so? Is dissent the new 'rude?'

I don't lump all atheists in one group. That's a hell of alot better than what I see on here with SOME atheists who laugh at anyone who thinks we are more than food for the worms.

[earthlover]

4. Good luck....you are, however, going to confront people just as closed-minded and evangelicalical

...as the Falwell folks!

Falwell folks of course think anyone who disagrees with their take on the creator or lack of one is wrong. Evangelical Atheists think anyone who disagrees with their take on the creator or the lack of one is wrong. Conformity is king, and gotta spread that conformity by accusing those who disagree of being small minded. What a trip!

Why do some atheists (not all) unwittingly take on the closed-minded "if they are not with us they are against us" schlock mentality of the Falwellians? It is not a particularly uplifting thing to emulate.

I get it! everyone respect each other's religious ideas! Novel thought! Co-Exist. Like the bumper sticker on my car.

I really get BORED TO TEARS with other-wise with-it people who look down their noses at people who look down their noses and are so clueless they don't see the contradiction!

[enlightenment]

8. Your tone, 108 - I didn't suggest you 'lump' everyone

into one group. But your tone was offensive, even to someone who recognised that they were not one whom you were directing your comments toward.

Thank you to the respectful atheists whose have posted comments that do not mock those of us who "believe," nor try to force their opinions on us. They have the right attitude. After all, one of the most common beefs on DU by some atheists (that I have seen in my short time of reading posts here) is directed at Christians and involves the stuffing of their views down society's collective throat. And yet these same atheists have no qualms about hijacking threads (relating to specific beliefs/ideas where the OP is not really asking whether something is true, but wanting feedback on those who hold the same tenets) and stating absolutes like "it's a fairytale." As if they know!

Here is a quote from a SCIENTIST (and these scornful atheist types LOVE science) named Albert Einstein. Ever heard of him?

'They have the right attitude' - so, clearly, only people who offer no dissent have the right attitude. Then why ask me if dissent is the new 'rude'? You've already indicated dissent is the 'wrong' attitude.

The last line is both scornful and rude. 'Scornful atheist types' - a comment designed to annoy. 'Ever heard of him?' - a comment apparently intended to stick it to those 'scornful atheist types' by suggesting that they don't know anything about Einstein . . . or they would know that quote.

It also removes Einstein's quote from context and reduces it to just words . . . kind of like quoting Shakespeare out of context. 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers', for example. Sounds like someone thinks lawyers are weasels - but really, the character recognised that the lawyers could thwart the evil scheme . . . the lawyers were the good guys. But you wouldn't know it from reading that single line.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you are suggesting that atheists are not entitled to theirs. It has to work both ways or it doesn't work at all.

[108blessings]

17. Nice try but I didn't say ALL ATHEISTS are not entitled to their beliefs

I have just found it to be the case that too many DU atheists were hot on the trail mocking Christmas last month. I don't celebrate the holiday myself, but I find it strange that they feel the need to shit on others' beliefs all the damn time.

Yes, I don't always add the disclaimer IMO to every statement I make. Too much a pain in the ass. So sue me.

Einstein is known as a very spiritual person and a scientist to boot. Known fact.

[ZombieHorde]

38. "mocking Christmas last month. I don't celebrate the holiday myself"

I both celebrate and mock Christmas. Why is mocking Christmas a bad thing?

I find it strange that they feel the need to shit on others' beliefs all the damn time.

Some people are not in a very good position to vent their frustrations outside of the internet, so a lot of venting happens here on DU. Not just atheists, but many DUers.

[ZombieHorde]

30. I did not find the OP to be rude in slightest, and I make mock posts all of the time.

[trotsky]

52. Thank you for your post. n/t

[cosmik debris]

3. Einstein?

He was a physicist, not a theologian. Is that supposed to be an appeal to authority?

I'm not sure who you are calling out, but I will take the opportunity to remind you that you have the right to believe anything you want to believe and I have the right to believe that your beliefs are bat-shit crazy. If you don't like to see beliefs criticized, you are in the wrong place.

[earthlover]

7. well, some folks think YOUR views are batshit crazy too. So the xxxx what!

I get tired of people calling other people batxhit crazy when they hold views different from themselves. That is what the Falwell people do. That is what you do. Enjoy your commonalities! I find both groups rather boring and unstimulating.

[cosmik debris]

14. If you are tired of it

There are other groups or forums you can visit. But you don't get special treatment.

(And I did not call the person bat-shit crazy, I called the beliefs bat-shit crazy)

[earthlover]

16. Well, would it make you feel better if a Falwell-type said your BELIEFS are batshit crazy?

Why the need to humiliate someone? Why the need to say their beliefs are CRAZY? Where...oh...where is there ANY RESPECT for another human being's beliefs that do not follow the ORTHODOXY of your beliefs?

I suppose you want to shut me out because I do not worship the feet you walk on and pander to your views. I, however, thought this was a forum where people can disagree.

How silly of me.....

[cosmik debris]

19. This is a forum where people can disagree

And we are not compelled to respect those beliefs the we feel are crazy.

I do not respect fascism. I do not respect racism. And I do not respect theism. Some beliefs are just not respectable.

Feel free to disagree 'til your heart is content.

[earthlover]

26. I think it is unfortunate you want to be a member of a forum where people disagree

but you are actually proud of the fact you don't respect those who disagree with you!

You don't have to agree with someone or their beliefs to respect them.

Respecting differing views is the first requirement of meaninful conversation. Too bad you share with the Falwellians that this is a silly thing.....

[cosmik debris]

32. Your sanctimonious name calling has no place in

meaningful conversation either. Your insistence that those who don't play by your rules are "Fallwellian" ended any chance of having a meaningful conversation with you. But you can only blame others.

Pathetic.

[ZombieHorde]

33. Just because Falwell does something, does not make that thing bad.

For example, I have seen a picture of Falwell wearing clothes.

[SidneyCarton]

35. Well, that does it...

I'm just going to have to become a nudist now.

(With apologies to my poor neighbors, who could have lived long, happy lives without seeing that)

[ZombieHorde]

37. EVERYBODY is somebody's type.

I don't what you look like, your neighbors may like what they see.

[SidneyCarton]

56. If they do...

:scared:

(Besides, Mrs. Carton would get jealous)

[Manifestor_of_Light]

5. Bad analogy.

Einstein did not believe in a personal god. He was most likely a deist.
Deists believe in an impersonal god.

[108blessings]

12. There are Buddhists who do so, also, not to mention Theosophists, etc.

That is why I designate myself "spiritual."

The problem is that too many atheists on DU believe that those of us who believe in a Creator automatically subscribe to (IMO) a childish view of God, which involves a particular human-like image of Him/Her/It, human-like emotions and actions, and other nonsense.

I don't worry about what Divinity "looks like." I don't believe that it can be contained. I don't believe that it is specific and I sure as hell don't believe in those myths attributed to all the organized religions of the world. They are suspiciously similar and I also think that organized religions have been created to control us. But that doesn't mean that I think that all this splendor is random and chaotic!:rofl:

[ZombieHorde]

22. "what Divinity "looks like.""

Hungry, divinity is hungry.

[sam sarrha]

25. sorry, but one can not be a Buddhist by defination, & believe a god can provide salvation.the gods

themselves...they suffer karmic rebirth, old age, sickness and death.. then start the whole Samsaric rebirth cycle over again, so they obviously cant save us if they cant get themselves out.

one can be interested in Buddhism, and practice the 8 fold path elements.. meditation etc, but you cant be a Christian, Jew or Muslim, etc.. and also be a Buddhist, Buddhists are totally responsible for their own salvation, no babysitters, no Nanny's, no one to hold your hand and tell you it will be OK.

[108blessings]

28. See, you are on that whole Christian/Savior trip! Go beyond, man!

Not all of us were indoctrinated with that crap. I was raised a liberal Christian, but thank the sweet Jayzuss it wasn't about burning in hell, etc. It was about feeding people.

[sam sarrha]

31. came old stuff, i was giving a DEFINITION, and there you stepped in it again..the person i replied

to needed some info,

i really have no idea how you put that reply together, you apparently didn't read my post..:shrug:

[108blessings]

60. Sorry, but I was responding to another poster...Don't know why it did that

Fiends...er, friends?

[Goblinmonger]

43. Careful

sounds like you aren't respecting certain views there. Don't want that, now, do we?

[Silent3]

47. So it's okay for you to call some views of God childish?

That's not very respectful of you, is it? You want atheists to respect your particularly mature theistic views, and other views that are up to your standards of maturity, but you know there are, after all, some religious/spiritual views so silly that we can all scoff at them, huh?

Or perhaps I'm being too generous? Perhaps atheists shouldn't scoff at anything, but you've earned the privilege to scoff at a few things yourself?

[stillcool]

6. I don't get it...

religion is dogma, and doesn't leave a lot of options open for the 'mysterious', true art, and all of science.

[earthlover]

10. quite the opposite....dogma is not religion!

I think you confuse the whole (religion) with those among the whole who are dogmatic. Not all religious people are dogmatic. If you actually believe that, you are blind as a bat! Quite to the contrary, many religious people have fought dogmas....including Jesus, I might add.

[stillcool]

23. I think whenever anyone believes..

what they are taught by another human being it is dogma. What is religion but a prescribed doctrine, a system of beliefs?

[sam sarrha]

27. /Dogma, defination

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma
Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization, thought to be authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or diverged from. The term derives from Greek δόγμα "that which seems to one, opinion or belief"<1> and that from δοκέω (dokeo), "to think, to suppose, to imagine"<2>. The plural is either dogmas or dogmata , from Greek δόγματα.

[earthlover]

29. thanks for the definition....obviously (to some at least) some religious people are not dogmatic

they openly explore new meanings, and are open to spirituality. They are more interested in social justice, helping the poor, loving their enemy, being humble, etc than in following the proscribed dogmas of their church. They are not dogmatic, but some of them sure as hell are religious!

[sam sarrha]

40. i grew up in an Extremist splinter group of the Free Holiness Pentecostal Church, i became an

Atheist at age 5... i Suffer from PTSD from Torture and systematic sadistic child abuse that really fucked up my life...these middle class mega church vanilla marsh mella Xings have no concept of how low and sick it can get.. they apparently dont think our suffering in the Dark Side of religion is of any consequence.. we are just an annoyance to a smooth delivery of their script. did i tell you about the time i was kidnapped by the Moonies..

i see things like Religion with an 'Over View', its all a spectrum of the same thing and having started at the very dismal bottom ... it's hard to put a good shine on that turd.

my mom is a Mother Teresa, a really good christian.. selfless, loving.. prays for everyone.. there are good christians.. in spite of it all. historically christianity is a mess. i hope some day they have a second reformation. till then it's just some guy telling his story, how he got off on the seratonin high.. and getting annoyed when you don't want to hear it all again.. its always the same story. some have a better act than others.


i didn't start out here "Lumping" them anywhere, i just corrected someones misconception of Buddhism. which caused the Christians some kind if misery.. Suffering is a given in Samsara,

[sam sarrha]

41. defination was for the others who might be confused about what denial is

[moggie]

48. That's not very respectful, is it?

I thought you wanted everyone to respect others' beliefs. How is is respectful to call someone "blind as a bat" because of what they believe?

[108blessings]

13. There is something BEYOND religion! I call myself spiritual

because I don't buy any organized religion. You do realize that some people think of themselves as spiritual beings yet don't swallow particular sects' views, don't you?

(It was on Oprah today!:))

[stillcool]

20. I am very well aware..

and it bothers me that people can not seem to differentiate the two. Religion is 'organized', it is a 'group' thing. Spirituality can not really be defined, because it is individual belief, and can not be 'practiced' with others..otherwise it would be 'religion'. Believing what someone else does is not spirituality. It is religion.

[108blessings]

24. Whew! I was beginning to go a little batty, there!

I think the problem is that many people grow up in fundamentalist homes or with Catholic doctrine and it's drilled into their heads that they are unworthy, are destined for hell...it's traumatizing and when they grow up, they want absolutely NOTHING to do with anything that mentions something beyond the five senses. So they never investigate sects like Buddhism, which claim that they are atheists! Or just read spiritual writers/believers in general...Closing one's mind is never a good idea, especially when it comes to The Meaning of Life.

[stillcool]

36. I think you're right..

in that it is not the 'religion', but the people who practice it, and preach it that are the problem. I'm sure there are many ways of interpreting any religion, that have no resemblance to how that religion is used and abused. People have believed in something as long as they have inhabited this planet, and I think the nature of the individual belief is probably very much the same. Unfortunately, religion is and always has been used as a tool to control..to keep people in line,..not to free them.

[Dorian Gray]

49. Well

if it was on The Oprah, it must be the gospel truth.

LOL

[onager]

79. Well, Oprah is, like, the ULTIMATE appeal to authority!

:rofl:

You also wrote: There is something BEYOND religion!

Prove it.

[GodlessBiker]

9. Are you suggesting religious belief should be treated differently than...

other kinds of belief and should be given a wide birth when it comes to challenges on the basis of evidence?

Why should a belief in god be treated any differently than a belief in just about anything else?

I believe religious belief should be subject to the kinds of criticism any other belief might be subject to.

[earthlover]

11. i don't think atheism or religion should be criticised....

you believe what you beleive. why the need to castigate those who believe differently? Why do atheists or Falwellians insist that those who disagree are idiots or sinners?

[GodlessBiker]

39. Why should racists or homophobes be criticized? It's just what they believe.

I think that what most people criticize is how a person's beliefs impact their actions and how those actions impact other people.

Who really cares whether a person believes in nothing but the material, or that African-Americans are genetically inferior, or that only those who go through the Son will be with Father? It is only when these people voice their beliefs and attempt to influence others, or use their beliefs as an excuse to change laws so that they conform to their beliefs, that people do and should criticize those beliefs.

[earthlover]

42. Racism and homophobia are always wrong. Religion may be good or bad. There is a difference

some religious people are supportive of gays and believe in love for all races. After all, Jesus was a person of color (he wasn't born in Sweden).

[laconicsax]

46. Yes, and when people base their racism and homophobia on their religious beliefs, what then?

Are we still supposed to respect their bigoted views and turn a blind eye to the violence they incite?

Funny thing about your avatar...
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize, every expanded prospect." -James Madison

[GodlessBiker]

57. Now you sound like those atheists who are always attacking religious folk.

What is deemed always bad versus what may be good or bad depends on whom you ask, no?

Seems to me the better approach is to challenge them all.

[108blessings]

15. I am separating religion from spirituality, though...that's the point here

Organized religions do so much damage in society. They may do some good, also, but their dogma is harmful.

However...that doesn't negate anything beyond the physical. Just because some people got in the God business and terrorized/indoctrinated others doesn't mean there is no Higher Being.

It seems to be very difficult for some people to understand that there is something beyond the dogma.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

18. Welcome to DU

You'll find the R/T forum a strange and wonderful place when it comes to atheists and believers.

One thing to think about is God concepts--for even atheists have them. An interesting thing to discuss is whether or not a person thinks God concepts can evolve, and if it is possible for groups to have members with differing God concepts. Another interesting thing to do is to discuss God concepts that are lesser known.

These can make for interesting topics for discussion.

[108blessings]

21. Hi there...you give some interesting grist for the mill

My concern is that too often the militant atheists basically cut off discussion with their mockery. They don't allow any room for discussion. Sorry, but I find that very sad.

[Crunchy Frog]

73. Nice of you to welcome him, but he's been here in about a dozen

different guises. Keeps getting tombstoned and coming back. Always posts the same kinds of threads. Trolls both this forum and the Health forum.

[SidneyCarton]

34. Don't bait the Atheists, 108.

It just pisses them off and starts a flamewar.

[108blessings]

58. One man's flamewar....

is another woman's intellectual exchange!:shrug:

[laconicsax]

44. Sorry, you don't pass GO and don't collect $200.

and stating absolutes like "it's a fairytale." As if they know!

The other option to dismissing certain beliefs out of hand is saying saying that while there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that <belief> is true and a whole lot of evidence to the contrary, you can never know for certain, so let's just leave it at that. It's the agnostic position and it is intellectually lazy.

(and these scornful atheist types LOVE science)

Everyone should love science--it's currently the best method of discovering how the universe works. Thanks to science, we have doubled human life expectancy, discovered cures to diseases, discovered electricity and found ways to generate it, explored other planets in our solar system and sent devices beyond it. Because of science, we know far more about the world we live in than we could if we still adhered to the notion that a supernatural entity created the universe in six days for the express purpose of enabling our existence.

If not for science we would be unable to discuss your smug superior attitude on the Internet, using from computers made from synthetic materials.

(In the quote you provided)

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious..."

It's true, without mystery, life would be absent of wonder and discovery. The funny thing is that religion takes away the mystery in life. Religious types are the only people who actually claim to know everything including the mind of their god. They claim to know the following things in exacting detail:
-How the universe came into being.
-How life began.
-What the purpose of our existence is.
-What happens to someone's consciousness/souls/whatever after they die.
-What God thinks about any specific issue.

I say they are wrong. I can't know for certain, but it is very easy to come to a reasoned conclusion that they are.

[108blessings]

59. Thanks for making my point; 'ppreciate it!

"The other option to dismissing certain beliefs out of hand is saying saying that while there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that <belief> is true and a whole lot of evidence to the contrary, you can never know for certain, so let's just leave it at that. It's the agnostic position and it is intellectually lazy."

Your words.

"I say they are wrong. I can't know for certain, but it is very easy to come to a reasoned conclusion that they are."

Your words. Again. Sounds like you are talking about yourself, there.

You talk about "religious types." Aargh! Over and over, I (and other posters) have described the difference between spirituality and religion. If you choose to lump me with the former category, that's on you but it's inaccurate.

[laconicsax]

63. Do you intentionally misrepresent my words or is it by accident?

To start, I did not label you as a 'religious type' since you said in your OP that you are not religious. That portion of my response was to illustrate who purports to have specific knowledge of things they cannot specifically know.

On to what you said that I said.

The other option to dismissing certain beliefs out of hand is saying saying that while there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that <belief> is true and a whole lot of evidence to the contrary, you can never know for certain, so let's just leave it at that. It's the agnostic position and it is intellectually lazy.

My words, emphasis added for your benefit

I say they are wrong. I can't know for certain, but it is very easy to come to a reasoned conclusion that they are.

My words again, emphasis added for your benefit.

Let me try to make this as clear as possible.

It is true that on such issues, it is impossible to know 100% either way. It is possible however, to come to a reasoned conclusion. I conclude, through reason, that there is nothing beyond this physical world. I do not know for certain that I am right, only that I am compelled by the evidence to take a stance. The agnostic position is to state that since it is impossible to know 100% either way we must avoid forming conclusions. Deciding to give up because you can never know for certain is intellectually lazy.

If that's too nuanced for you, then I apologize for your shortcomings.

[108blessings]

64. Sorry, but I distinguish between cluttered posts and nuance, but you go!

Your posting style leaves much to be desired and I still am not receiving regarding what you are saying to ME.

Surely you are not referring to me as agnostic (and therefore spiritually lazy).

Oh, and who died and left you the arbiter of reason? Hmm...?

If reason brings you to believe that all this splendor called creation is randomly Big-Banged into being, then I would say that is quite ludicrous. And I am not advocating for abandoning science, either. I never could quite fathom the claim that science cannot coexist with spirituality, but such a facile accusation is common on here.

[Goblinmonger]

66. Never mind n/t

[laconicsax]

68. These may help

http://dictionary.reference.com/
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/
http://books.google.com/books?id=jUdGajuJ0fMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=reading+comprehension

[salvorhardin]

45. A couple of other things Einstein said

"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

Einstein may or may not have been an atheist. His views on religion and religious belief were complex. However, I'm sure he'd take umbrage at anyone, believer or non, appropriating his words to support their cause.

Also, I should point out that strawmen are fun to tilt at, but in the end rather unedifying targets.

[varkam]

50. I think your analogy thingie is broken.

So you think that there is a good analogy between, say, having God on our money, God in our pledge, nativity scenes at courthouses, the constant conflation of morality and faith and...atheists saying mean things on DU? You really think that the two are equivalent when it comes to "forc(ing) their opinions" onto others?

:rofl:

[trotsky]

51. Let's face it, varkam.

For probably 99.99% of religious DUers, the mild (and really, in the grand scheme of things, compared to the shit atheists are smeared with every Sunday on *public airwaves* in the USA, it's fucking mild) criticism they see on DU is truly the most negative and insulting thing they've ever seen w.r.t. religion. When you have nothing to compare it to, of course it's going to seem nasty. Since it doesn't register with them that the US GOVERNMENT is basically saying "you're wrong" to every atheist in the country with the pledge, the currency, etc., when they read "you're wrong" on DU it's quite the shock.

[cosmik debris]

53. It looks like this poster died and went to purgatory

She hasn't received her tombstone yet, but I am certain that it is imminent.

She is just another reincarnation of the troll that has been busted a dozen times in the Heath Scare Lounge.

[trotsky]

54. "I see dead people."

"Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're dead."

[dmallind]

55. Another poster who can't see the difference

When you have to pay taxes with money imprinted with "We trust there is no God" to cover the cost of people who open Congress with a lecture that entirely mechanistic processes created the natural world, then atheism will be shoved down your throat.

When your kids pledge every day loyalty to a nation "under no god whatsoever because they don't exist" and then play football games where the coach calls all the players together to ask for no blessings at all because there is nobody there to bless anybody (oh of course your kid isn;t FORCED to do this - he can stand outside the huddle on his own to be ridiculed and ostracized) then atheism will be stuffed down your throat.

When 52% of the population wouldn't vote for religious - or "spiritual" - whatever that word means since everybody makes it up for themselves - people regardless of political agreement (far more than the closest pariah of gays at 37%), when they are the least trusted minority of all, and when seven states bar them constitutionally from elected office, then atheism will be shoved down your throat.

But I'm sorry that's just the same as being laughed at on an internet message board isn't it? They are equally egregious and equally onerous conditions, right?

So how about a trade - you support an America like that (not that I do, but then I'm not the one making an equivalency of the two) and I promise I will never laugh at Xians on internet chat sityes ever again, and will do everything in my power to prevent and correct others who do so.

Deal?

[108blessings]

61. Were you force-fed a particular religion? Methinks you were

Had you not been, those scenarios you describe would roll off your back. I don't particularly care for all this Christian crap, but I don't live in the Bible Belt, so I am not overly innundated with fundies. And when I watched Obama's speech this morning, it didn't escape my notice that he ended with "And may God bless America." That phrase always rankles me, if only because it's so selective in what nation gets blessed, not to mention the insertion of God into politics. But I'm curious if atheists who are/were gaga over Obama would rise up to demand that he stop saying that...

[uppityperson]

62. why do you have a birth control package as your avatar?

How many times must a poster be incarnated until they achieve nirvana? Is it a number? Or is it a state of mind, of letting go of the need to be right and not insult?

[Goblinmonger]

65. Yes, you're right

every atheist who doesn't like the creeping theocracy of the United States is suffering from some early trauma in religion. It isn't even plausible that they might have come to that conclusion through logic and thought and understanding of the constitution. It all goes to the god-shaped hole in our hearts.

Sheesh.

[108blessings]

67. Sheesh right back atcha!

I mean, it's nice and simplistic to accuse me of ALL THIS AND THAT and then it neatly is solved but I never said that ALL atheists suffer from dogmatic throat-shoving. That little wacky question mark should have been the tipoff, but hopefully you get it now.

[Goblinmonger]

69. Two things

1. Why is that the immediate conclusion you come to in order to ask the question?
2. "Methinks you were" kind of indicates that it isn't a question but your actual conclusion.

Don't piss in my ear and tell me it's raining.

[108blessings]

70. Oh, I get it...talk circles around me until I give in...mwah

Bow to your Flying Spaghetti Monster dewd and we'll call it a night, 'kay?

[Goblinmonger]

71. I have no idea how my post

is "talking circles around you." None.

Why not address the points? Why was your first assumption that something bad had happened? And why did you follow it up with "methings your were" if it was just a random question and not an assumption you were making about atheists? That's not "talking circles" that's asking for clarification/explanation. Sorry if that is too demanding on you.

And you're pretty snarky and trash-talky for someone preaching peace and "atheists bad" in an OP. Not that I'm complaining--I can handle it--but the double standard is a litte confusing.

[dmallind]

74. No I wasn't - armchair psychologists usually fail

Come to think of it real ones do too, but that's another question.

If such things should roll off the back of atheists then please again tell me should they roll off the backs of believers if things were reversed? What about substituting sexuality or ethnicity instead. Should exclusions and official imprimaturs of second class status for those roll off the back too?

Yes the clichéd speech ending rankles me too, and I certainly wish he'd stop, but far far less than the things you think should roll off my back. Because I like Obama? Not at all the reason. Bush saying them did not do any more or less rankling. The great probability is that they are meaningles expected platitudes for the masses. If they are sincerely felt then they are personal statements of faith which while a bit tactless on the part of the president of a secular nation are understandable in that the electorate who voted him in overwhelmingly agree.

But there's a big difference between that and the force of law or the official and unchanging national establishemnt of a single religious position as the norm and the stance of a country expressly set up to lack such an establishment.

The atheists who are gaga over Obama should be asked when we'll rise up against his tossing off of a regligious phrase to end a speech when the other far more pressing battles we ARE rising up against (albeit in depressingly limited collaboration) have been won.

[cosmik debris]

72. The OP is taking a dirt nap

It took the mods a while to catch this one, but they did what they do so well.

[moggie]

75. How long until the next Sock Puppet for Jesus?

Hopefully not long: I do so enjoy a puppet show.

[muriel_volestrangler]

77. Damn, I should read the thread before replying (nt)

[muriel_volestrangler]

76. Why are you so dismissive of fairy tales?

Traditional stories that teach us, when young, about other people. Yet you seem to think that comparing religious myths to them is insulting.

[cyborg_jim]

78. The analogy hits too close to home - most people don't believe fairy tales represent actual events

Yet a lot of people like to believe that the religious stories de jour do.