That’s sad. Now I feel bad about being mean to Captain Crazypants. See this? It’s my sad face.
Any resemblance to my middle finger is purely coincidental.
Why don’t you call him a big poo poo head? And then you could poke your tongue out at him, and threaten to get your daddy to beat up his daddy? But whatever you want to do, would you mind going and doing it with the other kiddies? There’s a good boy. Us adults are talking.
Having read this, I still can’t see anything other than the OP and his sympathizers being irritated that some people have the temerity to express views different than theirs. If there’s some larger point, it escapes me completely.
The larger point is, we’re more annoying than the religious ‘zealots’, due to the fact that there’s fewer of us and all we do is talk.
Really? Isn’t it how those arguments are delivered, in attitude and context that is the complaint?
I believe in God is different when you add, and you don’t so you’re going to hell.
I don’t believe there is a god is different when someone adds and if you do you’re a gullible fool.
Then I can only imagine how irritated the OP must be when he encounters those with religious beliefs different from his own. It wouldn’t be a generic “religion is a crock” but a specific “your religion is a crock and mine is the path to salvation.” I’m just curious how much “attitude” the OP has ever faced from atheists. His complaint seems to consist solely of “how dare you believe what you say?!” with no interest in analyzing the potential merit of what has been said.
That’s fine, though; he may have had one or two uncomfortable moments in his life, sharing a room with an atheist, and writing about them is certainly less conventional (thus almost certainly more interesting) than complaining about widely-accepted nuisances like doorbell-ringing JWs or agressive sidewalk preachers.
Anyway, the possibility the believer is a gullible fool has some support while the possibility the nonbeliever is going to Hell has none, at least until such time as Hell can be quantified in some way.
The most annoying part about a theist isn’t if they tell you you’re going to their imaginary hell or whatever. It’s when they don’t listen to you, or that (at best) they listen to you through some distortive filter that prevents the actual meaning of your words to get through and threaten their preconceptions. Now, that’s annoying.
(That and the prostelyting, and the legislating…)
On the other side, nearly anything the atheist can say is usually interpreted as “you’re a guillible fool”. Myself, I really like the santa claus arguments; I think they’re meaningful and relevent to the topic, with powerful explanatory power. I’ve also never seen a theist refrain from the kneejerk reaction the minute such an argument is presented.
Really, there’s no way to even exist as an atheist without at least passively making the statement that the theist’s closely-held beliefs are wrong, and therefore probably pretty dumb. If you dare to actually argue against their particular arbitrary beliefs, you’re inevitably going to offend them sooner or later.
That’s not what I said, and you bloody well know it. I wasn’t defending religion in general-just pointing out that wasn’t the ONLY cause of evil, dumbass. Life is NOT so black or white. Shades of grey and all that.
Would you ever admit that people committed good, while being inspired by their beliefs? Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Archbishop Oscar Romero, Msgr. Hugh O’Flaherty, to name a few.
And correct me if I’m wrong, but it has been my observation that you mainly harp on Christianity-have you ever said the same thing about Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc?
I’m not defending religion, or knocking atheism. I’m knocking fanatics, and idiots who see everything in black and white, as I said. Life isn’t like that. I don’t give a shit what you believe-I do give a shit how you ACT, and how you treat others who don’t feel the same way you do. I feel the same way about the OP, but he isn’t the one screeching and foaming at the mouth. You never have anything new to add, just the same old, same old.
What caused you to be so bitter and unreasonable on this topic? Seriously, what in your past has caused you to be so damned incoherant? I’m not being nasty-I’m genuinely curious.
No, you were suggesting it was just a people problem and not a religion problem because people are bad. But you would surely accept that sometimes a thing (“Thing X”) correlates with an increase in bad behaviour. Sure, that doesn’t mean that Thing X is, in and of itself, bad, or that it is a thing with bad intentions or whatever. But if, in the end, what happens when you have Thing X is a rise in associated bad behaviour, then maybe Thing X is not a good thing, overall.
You may argue that overall Thing X is associated with more good than bad: that’s your prerogative. But simply saying that people do bad stuff so therefore Thing X is OK, is bad logic.
I don’t know them well enough to say. But right back at you: would you say that Gandhi and MLK wouldn’t have done good stuff were it not for the religion at their backs?
Sure, no problem. You’re wrong. Consider yourself corrected. If you’d read this thread carefully you would see that at least once (I think several times) Der Trihs has made reference to 9/11 as something religious zealots do. I seem to recall they weren’t Christian zealots, no?
The first: would you then argue that those who have done evil in the name of religion wouldn’t have done it if they were atheists?
And you’re goddamned right, it’s a people thing-human beings would be doing shitty things in the name of ANYTHING, if they could get away with it. Blaming religion OR ATHEISM is a cop-out.
Again, WHERE did I say atheism was wrong or evil, and that religion was somehow better? My point WAS, that not EVERYTHING associated with religion is always bad (or good, for that matter)
As for the second, I believe you, but “cite?” as we say around here.
sigh
(Dammit, I’m tempted to start my own religion: The Church of Shut-The-Fuck-Up-And-Just-Get-Along-And-Get-Some-Fucking-Perspective)
As I said earlier, it’s hard to tell people they should rise up and attack others or restrict their freedoms or whatever in the name of a god they don’t believe in.
Thanks for making my point for me. People often do shitty things in the name of things. Atheism is a word we use to describe an absence of something. Pretty hard to do shitty things in the name of an absence. But as you admit, doing shitty things in the name of something is commonplace. The great thing about invoking gods as the “something” is that there is no evidence about what they stand for, and what you should or shouldn’t do in their name. So any charismatic asshole can convince the gullible that he knows what their god does or doesn’t want, and how do you prove him wrong?
You’re getting very shouty. I’m just here and I can hear you fine. Why do you ask this question? Did I say you did say this? I’m confused.
As to your point, it seems to be changing with every post. I could swear some of your earlier posts said a lot more than what you say here.
Post #229 he gives a shopping list of problems associated with religion, including ongoing killing in the ME which was an Islam/Jew thing largely, last I heard.
Post #268 he mentions flying planes into skyscrapers, there’s only one instance of that as far as I’m aware
Post #292 he mentions zealots blowing up buildings, something that seems to be done far more often by Islamic than Christian zealots.
Frankly, accusing another poster of having a particular (and in some ways quite offensive) standpoint, then demanding a cite because you’re more interested in throwing around accusations than reading the very fucking thread you are commenting in is jerkish, and stinks. You should know better. Should I cut up your food and spoon it to you, as well?
For literature, we don’t say it was god either. For natural beauty we do (well, not me ) since thousands of years ago there was no better answer than god. For exceptional acts of love or compassion, I hope people don’t give god credit - that would be insulting to the person doing it. It might be god inspired, but it seems more likely that it would be inspired by the image of god someone has. It might equally as well be inspired by the actions of a fictional character. If I were wounded and close to death, I’d think of Robert Jordan more than God.
That’s because they’re not meant to. Clearly the concept of god influences people. But is it a fictional concept or a real one in some non-fictional or mythic sense? I think all of your arguments about the influence of god work just as well even if god does not exist.
Belief in god, for many if not most people in the US, gives answers to these questions. Why? It is god’s plan. Where do we go from here? If the Rapture is coming, the answer is very different than if we must preserve the earth.
Unfortunately, the influence of President Bush is greater than that of President Bartlett.
Personally, I’m heartened by recent CNN reports that a great many Americans have shrugged off religion altogether.
Hopefully, this will be my last attempt to explain myself.
First, I suppose, I personally tend to see greed as one of the biggest causes of evil in this world. People tend to commit all kinds of attrocities, just for the almighty dollar, or to gain something over another. The kinds of shit the US pulled in Latin America was all done for the big corporations.
Now, this does NOT mean I’m a communist. It’s just been my observation. I don’t think everyone should believe as I do. It’s just my personal opinion.
Second, to be totally blunt, I just can’t stand Der Trihs. He pisses me off with his rantings about how poor and oppressed he is and blah blah blah. Other than him, the rest of you, I have no beef.
Okay?
(Now, who wants pie?)
Don’t think you can just smooth this all over by offering pie. This isn’t MPSIMS you know. Although, if you have apple I could probably just pretend this whole debate never happened. Thank you God for giving us apple pie, eh?
Gah, can’t even make a joke around here. Jesus.
Well, All religion is a crock pretty much includes “your religion is a crock” doesn’t it? It probably doesn’t matter where it’s coming from. The OP just happens to be commenting on atheists this time.
I don’t get the same attitude from the OP you seem to get. It seems to display some understanding and an acceptance of some arguments which IMO shows the merit of what is being said is being analyzed. You may not agree with the conclusions.
I agree there’s no real comparison between annoying religious zealots and annoying atheist zealots at this time. Religious zealots win the most annoying contest by a mile or two.
It seems to me that “all religion is a crock” indicates that person isn’t considering any merits or really listening.
Awww, **Guin ** that’s what I was trying to do. I’ll use a smiley next time.
Now have you got apple or what?
I’ve always sucked at comparative causation; I’ve never been able to stick "why"s on a scale and tell which one has caused more things of whichever kind to happen. (Heck, half the time I don’t know why I’m doing the things I’m doing.) However, I can at least agree with you that greed is a major cause of evil in the world. Anger’s another.
The real concern we critical atheists have with religions effects regarding making people do good/bad, is not so much its effect as an impetus (not to dismiss the inquisition, mind you) but its effect as an justification. Religion has both allowed people to justify to themselves various nefarious actions and thereby get past any lingering shreds of morality their greed left behind, but it’s also been quite useful in getting others to approve of, support, and even join in on your nefarious actions themselves, despite partially or totally lacking the greed, anger, or whatnot that instigated the action in the first place. Further, the greeds and predjudices of one group can get codified in religion and linger centuries past the initial impeller’s death. This has the effect of magnifying the effects of one man’s desires a hunrded or thousand or millionfold, by turning other people into their agents.
Now, this effect has been used for good things, of course; surely there are people who wouldn’t bother to do charitable things or donate or whatever without the encouragement and peer pressure of religion. But frankly, I think that we could figure out other ways to elicit donations, that weren’t such a wildcard with regard to negative effects as well.
Hmm, it seems I haven’t been offensive enough; I’ve fallen behind. I’ll have to work on that. 
Mmmm, pie.
Dutch apple all right?