# Atheists, and Dawkins, vs. Xians **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 3, 2009, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679 "2009-01-03T05:44:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/161 "2009-01-09T19:10:50Z")
Okay, so he’s a bigot. Whatever. Religion is still organized superstition. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/162 "2009-01-09T19:21:13Z")
But that doesn’t mean one has to be an asshole about it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/163 "2009-01-09T19:28:41Z")
Well, maybe he _likes_ being an asshole about it. Stop trying to stifle him. Just kidding. Stifle his brains out, for all I care. FinnAgain remains determinedly ignorant and deserved to get called on his bullshit, be it by DT, Dio, me, or any of the board’s atheists. ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/164 "2009-01-09T19:31:33Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, maybe he _likes_ being an asshole about it. Stop trying to stifle him. Next thing you know, people will start saying that they hate assholes. The bigots! ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/165 "2009-01-09T19:32:23Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > FinnAgain remains determinedly ignorant and deserved to get called on his bullshit, be it by DT, Dio, me, or any of the board’s atheists. What is it that he’s “determinedly ignorant” about again? Is it about **Der Trihs** being a dick, the existence of an all-powerful deity, or something else? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/166 "2009-01-09T19:36:23Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > FinnAgain remains determinedly ignorant and deserved to get called on his bullshit, be it by DT, Dio, me, or any of the board’s atheists. Ignorant of… what? What’s even funnier is that not only am I an atheist, but no one has pointed out any ‘bullshit’ other than to obfuscate the issue and claim that bigotry isn’t bigotry if it’s directed at someone who is doing you absolutely no harm but who happens to hold a philosophy that you disagree with. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/167 "2009-01-09T19:44:00Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > What’s even funnier is that not only am I an atheist I don’t care. I just formed the opinion that you’re full of bullshit when you kept equating religion to race and sexuality or, more accurately, thought you’d proven something when you changed some words to try to equate a valid challenge to religion with an invalid challenge of race or sexuality. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/168 "2009-01-09T19:57:28Z")
As, so in fact _you_ are ignorant and not only ignorant, but pig-headedly so. Where to start, where to start… you’re ignorant of the fact that bigotry is still bigotry if it’s directed at the followers of a philosophy, like Liberalism or Christianity, or even a hobby like stamp collecting. The simple act of being able to choose membership in a group wouldn’t mean that bigotry is no longer bigotry. You’re deliberately ignoring the fact that I also, specifically, used Liberalism as an analog, and it ‘proves’ the exact same thing. You’d also be ignorant of the fact that I wasn’t using the analogies to prove anything, as the definition of the words I’ve been using are already quite clear, but to point out the fundamental disconnect behind being upset at ethnic/sexual/political bigotry and allowing religious bigotry. I’d also point out that you’re ignorant of the fact that much of today’s research is converging on the concept that religious belief, itself, is pretty much neurological/genetic and most people predisposed to atheism won’t be swayed to religious arguments and most people predisposed to faith, even agnostic faith, simply have their minds wired that way. For agnostic theists it’s a matter of _aesthetics_, not _epistemology_. And, as such, hating people because of their inborn genetic structure which leads them to beliefs which harm nobody… Well, I’m sure you can follow along from that point. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/169 "2009-01-09T20:01:44Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I don’t care. I just formed the opinion that you’re full of bullshit when you kept equating religion to race and sexuality or, more accurately, thought you’d proven something when you changed some words to try to equate a valid challenge to religion with an invalid challenge of race or sexuality. What - hatred directed at people on the basis of their religion isn’t bigotry? The term _normally_ encompasses that, I thought, though I’d be interested in hearing sources or arguments otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/170 "2009-01-09T22:07:51Z")
I don’t care if you want to call it bigotry; the label doesn’t invalidate his underlying argument. Besides, it’s a useless baa-sheep response. Poster A: I distrust \ for the following reasons… Poster B: That’s equivalent to saying you distrust \. You are a bigot! It’s easy to pound your chest in righteous anger when group Y is homosexuals or some racial minority. Try substituting “the Nazi party” for group Y and see if that doesn’t make Poster B’s position all the more blatant as an appeal to emotion. And if you don’t get it, kindly and immediately commence fucking your siblings, and the resultant children and the resultant grandchildren so whatever mangled part of your DNA that makes you such a gibbering moron is recursively crunched into a monstrously idiotic descendant whose stark existence can serve as cautionary example to all humanity. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/171 "2009-01-09T22:24:34Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I don’t care if you want to call it bigotry; the label doesn’t invalidate his underlying argument. Besides, it’s a useless baa-sheep response. > > Poster A: I distrust \ for the following reasons… > > Poster B: That’s equivalent to saying you distrust \. You are a bigot! > It’s easy to pound your chest in righteous anger when group Y is homosexuals or some racial minority. Try substituting “the Nazi party” for group Y and see if that doesn’t make Poster B’s position all the more blatant as an appeal to emotion. > And if you don’t get it, kindly and immediately commence fucking your siblings, and the resultant children and the resultant grandchildren so whatever mangled part of your DNA that makes you such a gibbering moron is recursively crunched into a monstrously idiotic descendant whose stark existence can serve as cautionary example to all humanity. Saying one hates and fears people who are (for example) Catholic because they are Catholic isn’t the same as saying one hates and fears people because they are _Nazis_. I certainly hope most people can see the difference. :eek: I have no problems calling (for example) Chick Publications a bunch of anti-Catholic bigots, because they so obviously hate and fear Catholics. The term “bigotry” has always to my knowledge encompassed, specifically, hatred of people of a different religion. If you think it doesn’t, then you are the one insisting on some special meaning. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/172 "2009-01-09T22:38:25Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I don’t care if you want to call it bigotry; the label doesn’t invalidate his underlying argument. No, the fact that it’s based on a fallacious logic literally makes it _logically invalid_. That his premises are wrong in any case makes it _logically unsound_. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Besides, it’s a useless baa-sheep response. Ah yes… like all people who are opposed to racism and bigotry. Mere sheep. You, on the other hand, have seen the path to hate, beautiful fallacious hate. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Poster A: I distrust \ for the following reasons… > Poster B: That’s equivalent to saying you distrust \. You are a bigot! Nope. While it is equivalent to other bigotries, it’s bigoted all on its own. It’s also stupid and illogical (or irrational and delusional, as the hate crazed manchild likes to say so often). If you distrust, say, agnostic theists, along side Taoists, along side snake handlers, along side Unitarians… because of the actions of Fred Phelps, you’re committing the fallacy of division after falsely ascribing a unifying quality to religion-as-a-whole via the fallacy of composition. N.B. It doesn’t matter who you substitute for Phelps, the fallacy remains the same. In other words, you’ve set up a system of fallacious fungibility so you can hold pejorative views of all religious people based on the actions of only a few. But it’s okay, I’m sure your bigotry is much nicer than all those other forms of bigotry. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > It’s easy to pound your chest in righteous anger when group Y is homosexuals or some racial minority. Try substituting “the Nazi party” for group Y and see if that doesn’t make Poster B’s position all the more blatant as an appeal to emotion. First, it’s not an appeal to emotion, but fact. You’d sound less hysterical if you undestood what the fallacy of appeal to emotion actually means. As it is you’re abusing logic in order to defend bigotry. Never a good sign. Second, I’ve already addressed the obnoxious myth of “the hypocrisy of liberal tolerance”. You are, in fact, echoing those neo-Nazis who pretend that tolerance means that you have to tolerate their bigotry and racism, or you’re not really tolerant. Or gay-bashing Christians who tell you that you’re not as tolerant as you claim unless you tolerate their right to hate gays. You keep good company, eh? Maybe you’d like to argue why 'them Libruls are full of shit with their highfalutin ‘tolerance’. Why, they don’t even accept that the Klan is just as acceptable as the PTA!" Most importantly, one is not obliged to tolerate crime, hatred, bigotry, racism, child abuse, etc… That you’d even put a philosophical belief which doesn’t effect you at all, with _Nazism_ even on a superficial level? Well, it shows how deep your bigotry goes. It’s like asking “Well, you say I can’t hate people who collect stamps and that I’m a bigot because I hate stamp collectors. But what about child pornographers? You’re saying I have to tolerate child pornography now?” Contort all you want to explain why you’re a bigot. That doesn’t make it okay. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/173 "2009-01-10T01:52:56Z")
I’m not a bigot. I’ve simply been called one by an idiot, for what’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/174 "2009-01-10T02:29:29Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’m not a bigot. You just play one on TV? > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’ve simply been called one by an idiot, for what’s worth. You display a fundamental ignorance of basic English vocabulary, specifically your understanding of English vocabulary is [below what we’d expect someone in grade six to possess.](http://www.sandi.net/dingeman/6grade/spelling/index.htm) (Speaking of idiots…) But you’re still too stubborn to admit that maybe, just maybe, treating all religious people as fungible and having a negative reaction to them regardless of their individual humanity _miiiiight_ just be a tad irrational and prejudiced. Tell us more about how it’s okay to “distrust” all religious people but if anybody calls you out for your bigotry, they also have to be okay with Nazism, or something. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/175 "2009-01-10T05:15:46Z")
> [@Nzinga\_Seated](#): > > Dawkins touches on this attitude. There is a whole movement about it that has been dubbed Non-Overlapping Magisteria’, or [NOMA](http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_noma.html). His idea on that is even if we accept that there are questions that Science can’t answer, what gives any religion the authority to answer that question? God? Whose God? Anyone can just make up anything at all, so which people have the true authority to answer questions that science cannot? Good point. I would like to see a theist’s take on NOMA that considered the issue rationally (i.e. without invoking goblins or alien robots or what have you). What is the stock God-cult denial of NOMA? Anyone know? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/176 "2009-01-10T05:33:57Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Even if DT is a bigot, that doesn’t automatically make him wrong. > > Personally, the faster humanity relegates religion to the same dustbin as phrenology and the four humors, the better. The argument that mankind will be, or would have been, better off without religion is an opinion that really has no legs to stand on. Since we like to be accurate here and unsubstantiated beliefs are just opinions, that should apply to believers and non believers as well. **DT** is the fundamentalist of atheism in that his arguments have the same style and value as the arguments of fundie Christians. If you think “God said it so I believe it’s fact” is a stupid argument without any facts to support it then **DT** s “I said it so I believe it’s fact” without factual support is equally as stupid and empty. The fact that you prefer one argument over the other doesn’t change that. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/177 "2009-01-10T05:36:02Z")
> [@LurkMeister](#): > > Perhaps, **Der Trihs** , in your rabid hatred of all things religious you are unaware that there are Christians who do not persecute homosexuals, and even support homosexual rights. Any Christian who doesn’t desire to smite/stone to death/burn etc. homosexuals isn’t doing it right. The Bible is pretty clear on this. Millions of “Christians” think they can choose which part of God’s Word to obey and which part not to. Sorry, you don’t get to make the rules, Yahweh does. I see these pretenders as having each developed their own, personal religion _based_ on Christianity (usually very loosely so) but sorely lacking in either their knowledge or acceptance of true Christianity. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/178 "2009-01-10T05:54:32Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Tell us more about how it’s okay to “distrust” all religious people but if anybody calls you out for your bigotry, they also have to be okay with Nazism, or something. I think you misunderstood his point, which I took to be that just because you can ape the sentence structure of a statement, does mean the two statements are still equally valid if you are changing _all_ of the particulars. Hence, the difference between calling religious beliefs stupid and delusional because they value ancient myths over physical evidence, and claiming homosexuals are leading to the destruction of western society because of… something. A belief in Thor, ignoring the complete lack of evidence for his existence and the scientific explanations for how lightning and thunder are created in favour of Norse mythology, is irrational. A belief in unicorns, ignoring the complete lack of evidence for their existence in favour of fairy tales, is irrational. For the same reasons, a belief in the Christian God, ignoring the complete lack of evidence for his existence and the evidence against the existence of a benevolent, interventionist deity overseeing a world plagued by violence and natural disasters, is irrational. ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/179 "2009-01-10T06:33:44Z")
> [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > Any Christian who doesn’t desire to smite/stone to death/burn etc. homosexuals isn’t doing it right. The Bible is pretty clear on this. Millions of “Christians” think they can choose which part of God’s Word to obey and which part not to. > > Sorry, you don’t get to make the rules, Yahweh does. I see these pretenders as having each developed their own, personal religion _based_ on Christianity (usually very loosely so) but sorely lacking in either their knowledge or acceptance of true Christianity. You say this like it’s a _bad_ thing. Isn’t it kind of a victory of sorts for the rest of the world if compassionate adults seeking spiritual meaning might look at the hardcore fundamentalist approach and say, "you know what? I can buy “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” but I’m not going to have any part of “Suffer not a witch to live.” I may still see their beliefs as irrational, but isn’t this _progress_? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679/180 "2009-01-10T06:45:06Z")
> [@Cuckoorex](#): > > You say this like it’s a _bad_ thing. Isn’t it kind of a victory of sorts for the rest of the world if compassionate adults seeking spiritual meaning might look at the hardcore fundamentalist approach and say, "you know what? I can buy “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” but I’m not going to have any part of “Suffer not a witch to live.” I may still see their beliefs as irrational, but isn’t this _progress_? Nope. As long as you use the term “Christian”, It’ll always be up in the air as to what parts of the Bible you follow out of sincere belief, what parts you follow out of societal necessity, and what parts you might _start_ following if society relaxes its watch. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheists-and-dawkins-vs-xians/479679.md?page=10)