(I really do agree with Dawkins comments about being agnostic about fairies).
Seriously, DT, (not just yanking your chain): I think goblins and fairies are extremely improbable, but I wonder about the origin of the legends and am willing to entertain evidence for their existence or previous existence / extinction (not that I’ve seen any evidence so far), but generally live / act in ways that are consistent with them not existing (until proven otherwise).
(I consider that agnostic, although I would agree on the atheist side of the fence).
<shrug> Like you – IIRC previous arguments correctly – I’m very slightly *less *disbelieving of Zeus (and Thor – for whom I have a particular soft spot) and their ilk than of an omnimax mono-god just because the claims are lesser.
summarizes my position quite nicely. The experiences that have lead me to my position are: first, that I was an atheist until age 23. Second, that many of my relatives and friends were and still are. Third, that I can read what self-proclaimed atheists write in books, message boards, blogs, etc…
As an individual, when I was an atheist, I convinced myself that I was doing nothing to harm my fellow human beings and much to help them. (Campaigning for Ralph Nader in 2000, for instance.) In retrospect I can see that neither half of the equation was true. Most notably, lashing out with hateful comments on the internet was harmful, but I simply ignored that fact at the time.
If an atheist tells me that he has no problem with my personal beliefs and that he attempts to hold to the moral principles he views as best, I’ll take him at his word. If another says that he has no moral principles, I’ll take him at his word too. If a third says that he wants to deny me my basic human rights, I’ll take him at his word.
I have no reason to believe in any god, much better reasons to disbelieve any religion, and no reason at all to care whether there’s a god. Gods and religion do not have any impact on my life at all and I don’t spend time worrying about it. Religion or the lack of it don’t really have any importance to me at all.
Theism requires absolute faith in the existence of a deity.
Atheism doesn’t even court the possibility of a deity.
Agnostics hold no faith, yet at the very least (the very least) don’t 100% rule out a diety or First Cause.
And now we’ll circle back around to faries and the Green Lantern and it’s really just a soft form of theism. But really, I just can’t bring my self 100% to either side, so I do see at least 3 positions on the matter here. And bashing an individual for any of these positions is being bigoted.
So hating Nazis is bigotry? Hating someone because they think you and your family should be tortured to death is bigotry?
Your definition broadens the term “bigot” until it encompasses virtually all of humanity and becomes pretty much useless. It also turns “bigotry” into a perfectly reasonable position under all sorts of circumstances.
For all those who say that it’s wrong to categorically refuse to vote for the members of some religious group, I have to ask: would you vote for a Scientologist?
My guess is that said Scientologist’s politics are unlikely to be anything I would want to support. However, I would not vote against that person solely on the basis of his or her beliefs.
If it followed a whole flurry of demonstrations of a stereotype, it could be something like that, yes.
Any thread on the SDMB about religion or lack of it goes in the same directions sooner or later, if it lasts long enough. And it is not the theists who do it.
If it helps any, I will amend the statement to say that atheists’ tendency to tell other people what the others really believe is a little offputting.
This is wrong. You can be unsure that any gods exist yet believe one or more does exist and you would be a theist. Likewise, you can be without belief in the existence of any gods and not go as far to state definitively that none exist and you would be an atheist.
Also, depending on one’s definition of what a “god” is, atheists that do claim that none exist may have “proof” of some kind.
Atheism doesn’t “do” anything. One could think that the existence of gods are possible yet be without the belief in the existence of any. You don’t think the label of “atheist” fits that person?
Agnosticism is a matter of knowledge, not belief. Agnostic theists do believe in the existence of a god or gods. Many (if not most) atheists have no faith and don’t 100% rule anything out.
Indeed, the word “atheism” doesn’t mean anything more than a lack of belief in a god or gods. It does not necessarily connote a very strong degree of certainty about said lack of belief. Plenty of atheists I know are pretty lackadaisical about their non-belief.
I, for one, would readily concede that some sort of practically omniscient, essentially immortal being might exist. Most likely case, it would be a super-powerful, extremely technologically advanced alien race, but would still be absolutely bound to the material laws of the universe. The likelihood that some comparable being exists outside the bounds of the material laws of our universe seems very, very, very small. A likelihood approaching zero, but who can say it’s zero and be sure of that? Certainly, there is no credible evidence for such a being, in my opinion. Such a thing would be essentially unknowable, but hardly “impossible.”
That’s not bigotry, that’s rejecting bigotry (turned genocide in this case).
But, the point remains that if you associate yourself with an organization or group which condones acts of other forms of bigotry, you’re one yourself.
This is yet another reason why I choose not to become a member of any religion, political party or any other sort of philosophical group (other than the ideals of humanitarianism).
If hating people because of their beliefs is bigotry, then hating people because they believe in committing genocide is bigotry. The logic is straightforward.
