Insofar as I don’t know how to argue against someone who asserts that everyone who believes in a god is an idiot just because he’s a theist, then no, I have no argument. What’s going to convince him? Especially since he doesn’t seem to believe in actually backing his shit up. They’re stupid because he says they’re stupid. It’s like arguing with a 9/11 conspiracy nut. Sooner or later, you just run out of arguments.
I happen to think it’s a valid point, though. So Der Trihs believes himself to be smarter and more moral than every individual who ever believed in god? Well, gosh, I’d say that asking him exactly how he’s better is a good question. And if he has no answer to that, then I’d say that people who contribute to society as opposed to people who just bitch about it are better people, regardless of their beliefs or lack thereof. I never mentioned a paycheck, btw. The money doesn’t matter. It’s the contributing that counts.
And how do I know he doesn’t contribute to society? I’ve read his posts for a couple of years now. Call it an educated guess. :dubious:
I don’t know what they’d be. Still stupid, certainly. What I do know is that every single one of them that I’m aware of is a Christian of some stripe. I find that telling.
And quite often it’s “poisoned gifts” they are giving. “Gifts” given in concert with destructive lies, or used to coerce people into converting, or simply useless. Being religious, they don’t actually care about the welfare of others; they are concerned with pushing their religion.
That’s one reason I don’t approve of patriotism, either.
No, it’s mostly changed style, and much more importantly lost a lot of power. It’s no nicer, and it’s only goal it the same goal it’s always had; push Christianity down the collective throats of the world.
Because they are the defining feature of religion. They keep it alive, control it’s agenda, reflect it’s core values.
And that’s exactly what I do, and why I hold them in such contempt. As I’ve repeatedly said, and so have others, religion is utterly stupid when judged by the same standards we apply to everything else. I’ve noticed that this point has been repeatedly ignored, unsurprisingly.
And they do. What other motivation do the Catholics to lie to Africans about condoms, for example ? And all over the world people kill each other over religious differences; motivations that wouldn’t exist without religion. And so on.
The belief that money = virtue is common among American Christians.
Just for fun, try honestly imagining the conversation you would have with DT if you asked him whether or not this statement was true. Something like “DT, do you disparage theists because you just think they’re stupid? If that’s so, do you have any reasons at all for the assertation, or is that just your own subjective judgment?”
Is there any chance his response would be “Okay, it’s just my own biased, subjective personal views, fueled by animosity and bitterness”?
I think we can agree that this is an unlikely response, and he would supply you with more reasons than you’d care to read. My unsolicited, unwelcome advice would be that you don’t read them, then. But please don’t hijack threads you don’t enjoy reading in an ad hominem rant. I don’t enjoy reading those. Thank you.
Personally, in a country where the overwhelming majority of people self-label as Christians, I would find it far more telling if they were not Christians than if they were.
I don’t have to ask, prr. He’s said pretty much admitted to believing the content in your question for years now, which is sort of my point. No one even has to ask him.
No, Trihs. That’s not what you do. You’re happy to call them stupid and display your contempt, but when people take you to task for it, you suddenly become really busy with something outside of the Pit. You don’t justify your statements, you don’t stick around to continue the argument, and you don’t fight back. You’re the worst kind of coward. You’re the coward who doesn’t feel the need to defend his attacks.
I’m not privy to the inner workings of another’s mind (hint: neither are you), but I can think of many reasons why someone would oppose the distribution of condoms in Africa. Perhaps they are ignorant as to the scope of the disaster. Perhaps they’re prudes who don’t like the idea of anyone having sex without procreation. Perhaps they just don’t like black people. And so on.
Could you please be more specific? Which conflicts are you referring to?
I didn’t say you had to ask. I requested that you “try honestly imagining” his response. Your response seems to me lacking in honesty and in effort: you didn’t try very hard and you didn’t try very honestly.
Are you joking? You have to admit, agree with him or not, Der Trihs stands his ground and defends his position, more so than almost anyone on these boards.
I assume you’ve heard of a family by the name of Phelps?
DISCLAIMER: This is not a blanket criticism of Christians in general. fuji requested a cite, I have provided one. Personally, I’m content to live and let live (I’m in the nontheist camp). My only request is that the other side respond in kind.
All right, you got me. I went too far on that last.
Yes, he stands his ground. I was wrong on that. But for all his ground-standing, he never once offers an alternative. It’s always “Believers are this” or “Believers are that,” but he never seems to come up with anything better.
This is what gets me about Trihs. He doesn’t want to face the ramifications of his arguments in the real world. It’s easy to call an entire group stupid. The hard part is proving it. And he never even tries. He just kind of stands there and says the same damned thing over and over again, and it always seems to come back to “Believers are stupid, because they’re stupid.” For all the world, it sounds like a Baptist sermon on homosexuals.
His claim boils down to: people who hold irrational beliefs are irrational. I don’t really see how much additional support that claim needs. One can argue over the choice of terms, I suppose, but that’s rather pointless.
You assume correctly. In fact, I am indebted to the SDMB for bringing that clan to my attention back in the days when I used to lurk. (I still have the link bookmarked in case I need to explain who they are to a friend.)
I am also an armchair enthusiast of deviant criminal psychology, and see many of the same personality traits evinced by Fred Phelps as in some of history’s most depraved serial rapists, torturers, and murderers. As such, I am inclined to see his brand of Christianity as more symptomatic than causative of his family’s pathology.
And in response, I’ve chosen to pose the question of how exactly he considers *himself * to be rational. Which, given the circumstances, I believe to be a perfectly valid one.
If a person chooses to call a bunch of people irrational, not to mention stupid and murderous, it helps his argument if he himself can hold himself to a rational standard.
I should point out that I’m an atheist too. It’s just that I’ve run into far too many Christian surgeons, Jewish psychiatrists, Buddhist business owners, and Muslim engineers to believe that theists are by definition irrational. There are good theists out there. A lot of good theists. As I’ve indicated above, I’ve also run into my share of atheists who are raging nutcases.
I will fight for the separation of church and state right alongside the nuttiest of the atheists. I don’t care how much I like the individual theist; when it comes to politics, I’ll fight him straight up. What I will not do is measure the theist by a different yardstick from what I measure myself. I don’t care if he or she does it to me. It doesn’t give me any special right to do the same.
Are you kidding? The only reason these Atheism vs. Theism threads aren’t better than sex is because you can’t ask a messageboard to tie your hands to the bedposts and break out the hamsters and Cheese Whiz.
Well, not this messageboard, anyway . . .
Well, I mean, you can, but it would make for some pretty awkward Great Debate discussions . . .
It’s more like “People who hold religious beliefs, which I consider irrational by definition, are therefore irrational on an indeterminate number of other points as well”, which needs only to be articulated fully to be shown up for the nonsense it is. To give you a for-instance, I believe in God, which I fully acknowledge to be not susceptible to scientific proof, but when it comes to crossing the road, I rationally look both ways; I do not trust to faith to ensure that the way is clear.
It seems you’ve got the road-crossing thing down. If you could just figure out some method for rationally looking both ways before believing in things that do not exist (objectively speaking) then you would be peachy.
Well, they’re rational up to a point, beyond which all theists (that I’ve met) tend to make claims of a subjective, or irrational, or contradictory nature that effecftively squelches the conversation. “Tell me, Dr. Felsenstein, now that we’re done discussing brain surgery, why it is that you feel so strongly that God necessarily exists?” will not, in my experience, yield a rational answer, though the conversation up to that point may have been exceedingly rational.
You’re making the mistake, so often made, of assuming that because someone has some virtues, he is therefore immune to all accusations of vice. You’ve claimed that because someone contributes to society, or earns a living, we must refrain from criticizing that person when he chooses to indulge in religious practices that do harm to others.
I’m all too happy to let Dr. Felsenstein believe whatever he pleases. How I can possibly stop anyone from believing what he or she chooses to believe? But when he gets together with Dr. Cohen and Dr. Lefkowitz and they dream up ways to deprive me of my rights, I must object. This is no longer a matter of belief, which each man holds within his breast, as a result of his own meditation, but an assault on others. I want all organized religions to pay their share of taxes, I want all visual and aural displays of religion to be restricted to private meetings behind closed doors, I want all mentions of God or any other religious authority to be absent from public and secular life, and I want some rationality practiced everywhere but in the privacy of each person’s conscience, where they’re free to believe however rationally or irrationally they like.
I have no expectations that any of my wishes will be met immediately, and I’m content to view mankind sadly as a result of his insistence on obeying primitive instincts instead of challenging them and perhaps reaching some more advanced conclusions. If there is beauty and truth in religion, and I’m sure there is, then we can find that truth and that beauty outside of religion too.
