OK, you do that. Come to Georgia and do it. Let us know how it works out for you.
I don’t have any links. All I know is that when I started a thread in the Pit entitled "So, What Are You Doing With The Money “Fuckheads?”, directed at the administration of this board, some mod got offended to the point where he had to dig out some tame instances where I called someone an “idiot” in GQ or IMHO, (something I have seen high-timers get away with on many occasions), and suspended me on that basis.
If I had not made that post in the BBQ, nothing probably would have happened.
Really? You’ve seen that? I’d be interested in seeing that. Could you compile some links to the instances of that happening, and post them here for us to see, please?
I would estimate that “many” would have to be at least five, so let’s make that your target, okay?
If a refuting point is wanted, I would say that Zambini is, essentially, correct. Athiests are mistrusted in many place; of course it would be nice if that were not so, but it is, and that is the world we live in.
The problem with keeping quiet about your atheism is that it means that that won’t change. People with poor opinions of atheists will look around then and see no law-abiding, nice athiests. If we reasonably sane atheist types stay quiet, then the atheists that people will see are the nutjobs who wouldn’t stay silent if you paid them. And their views will never have a chance to be refuted.
Sitting down and shutting up would work, certainly (well, except in those cases where atheists are found out, and “lying” gets added to the list). And it would need to work, because things would never change.
Religious belief is a deeply personal thing, and electing to (dis)believe should be based on the individual’s thinking - not the parents. Attempting to force (dis)belief tends to fall apart as the kids reach adult age, go to college, meet perfectly functional people who (dis)believe differently.
As for the admittedly-dated case, it’s a matter of not relegating perfectly functional adults to some sort of Irreligious Ghetto. It’s not, with the rather notably noisy examples of Madelyn Murray O’Hair or Michael Newdow, a matter of non-believers having “sticks up their asses”.
Rather, it’s about not having some majority-religion’s stick forced up are asses by religiously-bigoted, unconstitutional, religiously-invasive government mandate.
Feel free to practice your religion as you see fit, but kindly restrain yourself from inflicting said religion on the rest of us - whether it’s a matter of the rest of having a different belief, or no belief at all. Freedom of religion is not about being free to force one’s religion on others - it’s about being free to practice one’s beliefs, and about not interfering with others’ beliefs.
The environment that is required for such freedom is a religiously-neutral, secular civil society and government, enforcing a common set of secular values that are necessary for a modern state. These common values are rather obvious, and are common to many religions - sanctity of life, restricted violence, personal property rights, yada yada yada.
As of this point you have been neither witty nor amusing. Since those were your goals I’d call it two for two, an unqualified success, and get out of the thread.
Well, since I and many, MANY others have lasted as idealists long past 26, you’re wrong here.
puts an arm around Der Trihs
HUGS DER TRIHS
Sheer brilliance. While I might not like the way you choose to argue your points sometimes, your willingness to point out the inconsistencies in your nominal or would-be fellows illustrates both your own intellectual respectability and the lack of same in those you skewer. Bravo.
I dunno; the banning thread said you had five warnings in five months. Pretty bad. I’ve been here for a couple of years, and never had a warning. You’ll probably say that’s because I kiss up to the powers that be, but that’s your life advice for the rest of us, isn’t it? Don’t rock the boat? Don’t try to be a hero? Keep your head down, and your disagreements to yourself?
Discussion? I’m afraid you’re confused. A discussion is when two parties put forward arguments and evidence to advance or refute a particular idea, position, or philosophy. What’s happening in this thread is, you’re throwing a temper tantrum, and everyone else is calling you an idiot. That’s not a discussion, that’s a cry for help.
It’s good that you’re aware of your limits.
Yes, I’m sure that’s just an unintended side-effect. The bonus for you is, this time you didn’t have to take your pants off first.
Oh, Zambini. The real world isn’t friendless, sexually frustrated, and full of impotent rage. That’s just you.
Please, please. This is a very confusing conundrum, but you must remember there are bigger things in this world to worry about than whether or not atheists can adopt babies: the war in Vietnam, the Kent State shootings…why, just yesterday, I heard the Beatles are going to break up! That can’t be true, can it? CAN IT?!
And I just heard that the voting age has been lowered to 18. Why, if it goes any lower, David Cassidy will probably be our next president! These damn kids and their pop stars- I don’t see what they see in them. It’ll die- it’s not like 35 years down the line or so, kids are gonna be clamoring for tickets for some flashy pop star with some ungodly name like Laurie Missouri or something like that.
This is, as a point of fact, incorrect. You had already received four of your warnings and were already teetering on the edge before you started that thread. The fifth warning (a well-earned one (in my opinion) in GQ) was simply the final straw.
I would like, at this time, to remind you that although more of a free-for-all forum, the Pit is not immune to the “Don’t be a jerk.” rule.
