# Der Trihs **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 3, 2009, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150 "2009-11-03T08:22:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**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:** [November 4, 2009, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/141 "2009-11-04T05:49:15Z")
> [@Stan\_Shmenge](#): > > My girlfriend would tell you that Jesus never said a word about gays, and his word supersedes anything in Leviticus. The whole reason God sent Jesus was things were of hand and he was to straighten things out, and provide a way to be forgiven for all the nonsense that was taking place, so his word is the final say in things. She thinks gays should be allowed to do what they want. And she is most definitely a Christian. That’s sweet, but until your girlfriend spends millions on advertising and influencing politicians her opinion on Christianity won’t mean jack shit to anyone but her close friends. Can any of you come up with top tier people that represent Christianity as you believe it should be? You know-the ones that can get on the major networks to make their points, and pay for the big stadiums in major cities for rallies? The ones that do this represent Christianity to the public at large whether you like it or not. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/142 "2009-11-04T06:26:05Z")
> [@ToeJam](#): > > … I can see how others would agree that he means well but his extremist views can turn off more people than on. His views are not extremist at all. He simply chooses more blunt language to present them than most would, including myself, becuase I prefer to avoid confrontation with crazies. ---
**Author:** ![ToeJam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@ToeJam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ToeJam)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/143 "2009-11-04T06:53:42Z")
Well, I would consider that extremist- there is no compromise with him. It’s all or none. He believes not in Religion and Atheism being equally tolerated and equally respected, and having equal say (which is what I believe should be the middle ground), but rather in one side being HEAVILY favored over the other. I’d rather just have Atheists have a completely equal footing, and to have a separation of church and state. If an individual is religious that’s not a concern to me, much like their sexuality. It’s only if they choose to impose their beliefs on me would I have an issue with it. That’s I think the middle ground. I’m thinking DT probably wants MORE than that. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/144 "2009-11-04T06:57:47Z")
> [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > **Der Trihs** is willing to go a lot further but IMO, he mostly tells it like it is. He is like the kid who is willing to point out that the Emperor Has No Clothes while everyone else shushes him. I am glad that there are people like him that are willing to go so far. Only rarely do I feel he goes _too_ far but I’d venture that most folks here–atheist or not, believe the opposite. Problem being that everyone else shushes him. It’s not very effective is it? One of the funny (and sometime quite annoying) things about human interaction is that many people have tremendous respect for and will listen to likeable personable polite idiots who are totally wrong while ignoring abrasive impolite people who are completely correct. What I am pointing out is that I am entirely on board when it comes to the question of what religion might deserve, but I think there is another question namely what will be effective against it. ---
**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:** [November 4, 2009, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/145 "2009-11-04T07:06:05Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > Problem being that everyone else shushes him. It’s not very effective is it? One of the funny (and sometime quite annoying) things about human interaction is that many people have tremendous respect for and will listen to likeable personable polite idiots who are totally wrong while ignoring abrasive impolite people who are completely correct. > > What I am pointing out is that I am entirely on board when it comes to the question of what religion might deserve, but I think there is another question namely what will be effective against it. Can you name some atheists that get listened to by religionists? ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/146 "2009-11-04T07:07:25Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Can any of you come up with top tier people that represent Christianity as you believe it should be? You know-the ones that can get on the major networks to make their points, and pay for the big stadiums in major cities for rallies? The ones that do this represent Christianity to the public at large whether you like it or not. [Reverand Spong](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong)? Eh, I guess NPR doesn’t count. Responding to what you said upthread, most Americans receive their exposure to Christianity… via their local church. The Salvation Army, AA, etc. also play a role. It’s the nonchristians for whom Christianity seems equivalent to Fundamentalism. One problem is that mainline Christians and pre-Fundamentalist churches often believe religion to be a private matter. So engaging with the Falwells, Robertsons, Bakkers and other showbiz types sort of defeats the purpose. “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.” Promoting traditional quiet piety is a challenge. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/147 "2009-11-04T07:09:57Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Can you name some atheists that get listened to by religionists? Polycarp listens to everybody. And quite a few religionists like ecumenicalism and have gotten over their problems with atheism. ETA: Point taken though. It’s not like politeness changes minds all that well. ---
**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:** [November 4, 2009, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/148 "2009-11-04T07:13:15Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > ETA: Point taken though. It’s not like politeness changes minds all that well. Heck, the religions didn’t spread through politeness, either. It was all conquest and conversion and putting folks to the sword and such. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/149 "2009-11-04T07:14:41Z")
> [@ToeJam](#): > > He believes not in Religion and Atheism being equally tolerated and equally respected, and having equal say (which is what I believe should be the middle ground), but rather in one side being HEAVILY favored over the other. Giving equal respect and equal say is only of merit if both sides are valid viewpoints. But religion and atheism are not equally valid: one is the most probable explanation based on our current understanding of the world, and the other is a bunch of illogical bronze-age mumbo-jumbo. You know, it’s really annoying when people act like neutrality has inherent merit, no matter how one-sided the situation really is. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/150 "2009-11-04T07:18:16Z")
> [@ToeJam](#): > > He believes not in Religion and Atheism being equally tolerated and equally respected, and having equal say (which is what I believe should be the middle ground), but rather in one side being HEAVILY favored over the other. That’s because the religious side is completely and utterly baseless, not to mention silly. WHY should religion be given “equal time”? Why, exactly, should it be treated any more seriously than someone claiming that the world is secretly run by invisible gnomes? Atheism is and should be the logical default; there IS no rational reason to believe there is any such thing as a god. When some actual evidence of gods shows up; THEN you can reasonably claim that equal consideration should be given to both sides. But until then, there’s no reason to look at religion as anything other than baseless nonsense that happens to be popular and powerful. I rather doubt you’d be calling me extreme if I was mocking the claim that the world is hollow and filled with chocolate; a claim that is actually more plausible than the existence of God. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/151 "2009-11-04T07:20:49Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > But religion and atheism are not equally valid: one is the most probable explanation based on our current understanding of the world, and the other is a bunch of illogical bronze-age mumbo-jumbo. And yet both are inferior to empirical agnosticism, the only truly rigorous belief system. Via supreme coincidence it happens to be what I subscribe to. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/152 "2009-11-04T07:44:05Z")
**Czarcasm** , me for a start. I have a number of friends who I have gradually influenced away from religion. I wouldn’t even be friends let alone have influenced them if I’d just told them they were insane and their beloved church was evil. Even if they were insane and their church evil. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Heck, the religions didn’t spread through politeness, either. It was all conquest and conversion and putting folks to the sword and such. I don’t think this is right. Of course what you say has occurred, but a lot of religion is spread by procreation, by love-bombing and providing a community focal point, by giving people comforting answers. The superstition stuff is sold as part of a package, and most of the package is community support and involvement. Even if the underlying basis is actually quite subtly insidious, it is politely done. Furthermore, even to the extent that you are correct, it’s irrelevant to my particular point which is that \*\*Der Trihs’ \*\*tactics are _ineffective_. Atheists aren’t in a position to fight religion by conquest and conversion, since we don’t have the numbers (not that I’m suggesting it would be the right thing to do anyway, but you see my point). ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/153 "2009-11-04T08:37:34Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > Furthermore, even to the extent that you are correct, it’s irrelevant to my particular point which is that \*\*Der Trihs’ \*\*tactics are _ineffective_. Atheists aren’t in a position to fight religion by conquest and conversion, since we don’t have the numbers (not that I’m suggesting it would be the right thing to do anyway, but you see my point). The other thing to bear in mind is that _Militant_ atheism seems to be a largely US phenomenon. Sure, I see people at uni reading “The God Delusion” or any of the other Richard Dawkins books, but really, my experience is that people in Australia and New Zealand really don’t care if you’re religious or not, as long as they don’t have to hear about it one way or the other. ---
**Author:** ![ToeJam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@ToeJam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ToeJam)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/154 "2009-11-04T08:48:56Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > That’s because the religious side is completely and utterly baseless, not to mention silly. WHY should religion be given “equal time”? Why, exactly, should it be treated any more seriously than someone claiming that the world is secretly run by invisible gnomes? Well, to simply things, I view it as Linus and his Security Blanket. For some people, religion is that security blanket. It’s something that not everyone needs, but it doesn’t harm him to HAVE it per se (though in peanuts he did tend to get all religious and try to spread the word, but still). Basically, that’s how religion should be- it should be there for the people who need it, and the people who don’t can pass on it. I say if it doesn’t HARM someone, then why not allow them to have it. Like meditation, acupuncture, or placebos. As long as they are not skipping out on actual medical cares, or trying to force others to follow it, what harm is there in allowing it to occur? Now I admit that most religions don’t work this way at all, that’s why I do find myself agreeing with. But in MY perfect world, I think religion would be a valid option but not something that needs to be for everyone. As long as it doesnt harm anyone else, there is no reason that I should dictate your beliefs, views, or practices. It’s only when your such things start to affect my own views should I begin to be concerned about them. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/155 "2009-11-04T10:30:16Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > The other thing to bear in mind is that Militant atheism seems to be a largely US phenomenon. That’s because Australia and New Zealand aren’t as religious as the US. You don’t see the dark side of the thing as much, although there have been some issues with Muslims at least in Australia. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/156 "2009-11-04T11:09:23Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > That’s because Australia and New Zealand aren’t as religious as the US. You don’t see the dark side of the thing as much, although there have been some issues with Muslims at least in Australia. That’s a racial/xenophobial issue rather than a religious one, unfortunately. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/157 "2009-11-04T11:11:55Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > I didn’t see anyone comment on this, but I think there’s a very important distinction here. I absolutely agree that emotions are neither good nor bad. People often think of happiness as good or sadness as bad, but that’s just a judgment of the general pleasantness of the emotion. The actual value of an emotion is not tied to it’s pleasantness, as I’m sure we’ve all seen plenty of people do bad things because it makes them happy, or fight for a worthy cause because of something that made them sad; in many cases, it’s purely neutral. > > However, hate is not an emotion. From Merriam-Webster: “intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury”. Personally, I find very worrisome that you’re conflating anger and hatred to be very disturbing as it seems clear to me that your hatred is derived from your anger. > > Now, your anger I think is not only reasonable, but in some cases justified. As a Christian myself, I can understand anger toward a lot of the things that have been done in the name of religion like genocide, persecution, and intollerence. In fact, I share that anger. However, hate is never a justified action, it’s usually is counter-productive, and it distorts your perspective of the positive things about the object of your hatred. > > So, sure, if you don’t like the things that have been done in the name of religion, do something positive about it. If all you do is hate, it puts you on the same level of other hates from historical racists to the God Hates Fags bunch. Instead, if you think it’s based on ignorance, make an effort to spread what you believe to be the truth. If you see haters, do what you can to expose them to the humanity of those they hate. And do the same for yourself. > > You see, hatred has a way of dehumanizing the objects of your hatred. It’s hard to through hate at someone you know intimately, but it’s important to realize that people, even those who anger you, are still human and deserve to be treated with the same level of human decency that you would treat anyone else. I think if you look beyond the loud and hating minority of some religious zealots, you’ll find plenty of people who are very reasonable, compassionate, and non-hypocrites who actually practice what they preach. > > So, seriously, cut back the the hatred, it’s bad for you. Don’t make your anger out to be something negative; use it to effect the world in a positive way. There’s nothing wrong with hating an institution. If he was out there “hating” people, i.e., physically harming them, or blocking the doors to their religious buildings, you’d have an argument. I hate on an emotional level, too. That doesn’t mean it spills over into actions that harm people. Der Trihs’s vocalization of his anger toward religion IS productive. There’s nothing wrong with saying, “Back off. You’re HARMING me,” which is what religion is doing in this country. It’s self-defense. Sometimes we need to speak louder than the voices in their heads. ---
**Author:** ![Mellivora\_capensis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mellivora\_capensis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mellivora_capensis)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/158 "2009-11-04T12:03:35Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > … the world is hollow and filled with chocolate;… ::starts digging:: ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/159 "2009-11-04T12:20:30Z")
> [@Mellivora\_capensis](#): > > ::starts digging:: See? Proof that **Der Trihs** words do influence people! ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2009, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150/160 "2009-11-04T12:49:20Z")
IMO, the worst you can say about Der Trihs is that it appears as if he engages in debating the retarded, and he doesn’t cut them any slack. That makes a lot of people uncomfortable, as if he was beating up on one of Jerry’s Kids. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/der-trihs/516150.md?page=9)