# There Are No Atheists On This Board **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 10, 2005, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925 "2005-03-10T23:52:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/81 "2005-03-11T16:16:14Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > So I should not be upset with **you** or **Muffin** , then, because some clown somewhere insists that **all** us religionists are in it for power and/or money? > > Can you draw the logical parallel that was the freakin’ **point** to my OP? As I pointed out, there is **no** logical parallel because you are comparing two utterly dissimilar entities. As for the point you are making, a clown claiming you are in it for the power and the money can be ignored. Pointing out that an Episcopalian might be expected to believe in Episcopalian theology, OTOH, is not IMO unreasonable. Expecting that a generic Christian would accept generic Christian theology is neither unreasonable nor a gross generalization. Let’s take another example: “Citizens of the United States speak English.” Now that’s not true in every case, clearly, but overall it is a true statement. Most Americans do speak English. Is there any justification for someone to claim to be _insulted_? by that statement. “Soy un ciudano de los Estados Unidos, y sus palabras me duele!” ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/82 "2005-03-11T16:18:46Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > I also have a problem when stupid people insist on turning a discussion about Christian doctrine into insults. "Christian’s don’t believe in love, but obedience becaused that’s what their doctrine. . . " > “How DARE you insult all Christians! WE do so believe in love, you asshole!” > "Hey, the Bible is supposed to be the authority from which teachings are derived, and it says here. . . " > “Fuck you, you can’t impose your view of the Bible on Christians,. My view is different so you’re insulting me AGAIN!” > "Dude, you’re being a jackass about this. . . " > “Stop painting yourself as a victim, you hypocritical liar! I am a Christian, but I don’t have to be polite to YOU!” > “But. . . wasn’t that my point?” > “NO, you used comPLETEly different wording, so you’re not only a hypocritical liar, you;re a lying hypocrite!” For those of you who want to read what really transpired, I strongly suggest you try to wade through this [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=305832). The above is just spin. And **gobear** , you can’t keep doing this and think you’ll get away with it. People _will_ read what you’ve written; twisting, rephrasing and distorting on different pages or in different threads doesn’t make the earlier shit go away. It just makes you look dishonest. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/83 "2005-03-11T16:34:41Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > So I should not be upset with **you** or **Muffin** , then, because some clown somewhere insists that **all** us religionists are in it for power and/or money? > > Can you draw the logical parallel that was the freakin’ **point** to my OP? You are free to be as upset as you want at whomever you want, just as you are free to believe in whatever god you want, and to follow whatever religion you want. I would prefer if you keep your religious clap trap to yourself, but that is my concern, not yours. Fortunately for me, I find you about as inoffensive as a religious person can be. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/84 "2005-03-11T16:38:15Z")
> [@leander](#): > > For those of you who want to read what really transpired, I strongly suggest you try to wade through this [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=305832). The above is just spin. > > And **gobear** , you can’t keep doing this and think you’ll get away with it. People _will_ read what you’ve written; twisting, rephrasing and distorting on different pages or in different threads doesn’t make the earlier shit go away. It just makes you look dishonest. I don’t know how you can call me dishonest; thank you for linking the thread because it bears me out. You and the others didn’t pay the least attention to anything I wrote because you were already determined that I was “insulting” Chrstians. You chose to ignore the examples I proved to illustrate my point, started out hostile, then called me names for responding in the same vein. Even in your first post in this thread, you ignore the points I’ve made and just start ouit calling me “dishonest.” When I complain aobut it, you say I’m acting like a martyr. When Ipost my perspective, you call me dishonest,. When I listen to your points and try to introduce nuance into my argument, you say I’m backpedaling. Why should I waste any more time on you? ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/85 "2005-03-11T16:46:08Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > When I complain aobut it, you say I’m acting like a martyr. When Ipost my perspective, you call me dishonest,. When I listen to your points and try to introduce nuance into my argument, you say I’m backpedaling. Why should I waste any more time on you? A man hits someone in the head with a 2x4. When he’s arrested, his defense is: When I move my piece of wood, you say I attack people. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/86 "2005-03-11T16:54:52Z")
> [@Metacom](#): > > A man hits someone in the head with a 2x4. When he’s arrested, his defense is: When I move my piece of wood, you say I attack people. More accurately, someone rams his head into a piece of wood the man is holding, and then cries assault. ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/87 "2005-03-11T16:57:44Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > I don’t know how you can call me dishonest; thank you for linking the thread because it bears me out. You and the others didn’t pay the least attention to anything I wrote because you were already determined that I was “insulting” Chrstians. You chose to ignore the examples I proved to illustrate my point, started out hostile, then called me names for responding in the same vein. What in the world are you talking about? You think that thread “bears” you out? How incredibly delusional. And now you want to start lying again. 1) I responded to your argument, provided Scriptural reference and ask for a debate; you “acknowledge” that, but refused to even consider the other point of view. 2) As already pointed out in that thread, I most certainly didn’t “start out hostile”. 3) Called you names? Sorry, but if you continually lie, then you are a liar. If you are making gross generalizations bashing Christians (which you _still_ are afraid to directly refute), but cry the victim when some schmucks bash you for being gay, then you’re a hypocrite. And sorry, I don’t feel like getting into another discussion about the “nuances” of Christianity in another thread with someone who behaves this way. Especially when you’re going to start spinning the other with such vigor that you make O’Reilly look like the Dalai Lama. 😉 I’ve tried being reasonable with you; and I’ve also tried confronting you. Nothing works. Just don’t expect to try to spin that thread here and not have people expose it. Once again, for those of you who want to know what really happened, go read for yourselves. (Sorry, I’ll try not to hijack further.) ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/88 "2005-03-11T17:12:59Z")
> [@leander](#): > > And now you want to start lying again. 1) I responded to your argument, provided Scriptural reference and ask for a debate; you “acknowledge” that, but refused to even consider the other point of view. Given that I was fighting several people in a pile-on, what could have been a useful discussion got derailed into a dogfight. > [@](#): > > 1. As already pointed out in that thread, I most certainly didn’t “start out hostile”. Starting a Pit thread isn’t exactly friendly, but your first substantial post read > [@](#): > > There are indeed (IMHO) so-called “Christians” who have attempted to hijack the faith, and who have twisted the true teachings of Jesus to some perverted end. But to group and label all Christians as gobear did (and does, often) is just as **stupid** as when bible-thumpers label all homosexuals as deviant, evil, etc. In fact, the apparent **bigotry** is ironically similar. > > The purpose of this thread is to get an explanation and “defense”, if you will, from gobear in re: his statement. I would hope folks won’t pile on – course, that may be difficult if he is endorsing some kind of **bigotry** Tell me again you weren’t hostile from the get-go. [quote] 1. Called you names? Sorry, but if you continually lie, then you are a liar. > [@](#): > > Oh, and substitute “fags” for “the faithful” in your (yet another) bigoted generalization and perhaps you’ll see how you’re looking at a mirror when others treat you like shit. Gosh, where did that come from? You could have said “gays” or “homosexuals” to illustrate your point. You whipped that “fags” out there to be deliberately infammatory. > [@](#): > > I’ve tried being reasonable with you; and I’ve also tried confronting you. Nothing works. Just don’t expect to try to spin that thread here and not have people expose it. Indeed, read the thread. > [@](#): > > (Sorry, I’ll try not to hijack further.) Sure, you will. ---
**Author:** ![Foible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Foible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Foible)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/89 "2005-03-11T18:17:52Z")
> [@Waverly](#): > > Nobody is trying to impose their religion on you. No one. Niemand. Nadie. Nessuno. What is being crammed down your throat is someone’s idea of **ethics**. Religion is just a sometime justification for what they really want to do, and that is impose their ethics on you. Think about it. Do you really think the Johns and Janes of conservative America are thinking, “oh no, Gobear isn’t living by God’s word, let’s set him strait.” Or rather, is their first thought, “I just don’t like the way Gobear is living his life.” This can be followed by any number of legal or religious justifications – but the thought is first, the justification is bolted on after the fact. If someone’s ethics come from their religion then what’s the difference? I live in Oregon where a coalition of self-righteous religious foks just got their definition of marriage written into our constitution. Their justification? The bible! I don’t get what your point is, are we supposed to “hate the ethics, love the dogma?” > [@Gobear](#): > > Again, atheism has no rules, Christianity does. To say one is an atheist is to deny the existence of deities. Therer are no governing bodies that impose obedience on atheists, there is no creed, no liturgy, no church. They are fundamentally different. Atheists don’t defrock one another in heresy trials. Gobear has a good point here. Atheism isn’t a group, it is just a label for people who don’t belong to a particular group. There is no reason to assume they have anything else in common other than a “lack of belief in god or gods.” Christians wave around the same instruction book for how to live yet can’t agree on what it says. For what it’s worth Gobear, it does look like you’re getting a lot of undeserved crap from the “love thy neighbor” crowd, but you’re defending yourself very well. ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/90 "2005-03-11T18:18:24Z")
Nah, no need to bother (further) hijacking this thread. Your lies are pretty clear to all. I’ll check back later in the other thread to see if you’ve gotten around to responding (as promised). But I have the feeling you’ve fled that place after you were exposed, so now you’ll carrying on here with further lies and spin. I guess I can add “chicken-shit” to your shining resume. Which isn’t really “name-calling” if it’s true. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/91 "2005-03-11T18:40:55Z")
> [@leander](#): > > Nah, no need to bother (further) hijacking this thread. Your lies are pretty clear to all. > > I’ll check back later in the other thread to see if you’ve gotten around to responding (as promised). But I have the feeling you’ve fled that place after you were exposed, so now you’ll carrying on here with further lies and spin. > > I guess I can add “chicken-shit” to your shining resume. Which isn’t really “name-calling” if it’s true. 😉 I hate to break it to you, but I’ve been doing other things today than respond to you, ands you are way down on the priority list. Want the rough draft? Here it is, minus the really inflammatory paragraphs I wrote. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > And I know you won’t believe it, but the purpose of this thread wasn’t to embarrass you. I’m sorry it’s turned out that way. > > Um, I’m not embarrassed, sorry to disappoint. My point on faith/virtue hasn’t been refuted, merely contradicted. I refer you to the Monty Python Argument Clinic sketch to explain the difference. > > As for my response to Christianity: > I don’t have any animus to Christians as people, and I don’t go out my way to criticize their faith, except when their leaders are misbehaving or when I’m arguing for reason over faith. There is no evidence for Gods, and a great deal against. Take the recent tsunami; the arbitrary deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people is not consistent with the all-loving, all-powerful God that the Christians say exists. Sure, you can duck the question with a shrug and a “God works in mysterious ways,” but that’s no answer to the dilemma posed by natural disasters. > > As for the statement that has your panties in a twist, I do not see how a Christian can argue that one can earn salvation when the Bible is clear that is not so. The Bible verses you cited do enjoin virtuous behavior, that much is so, but that comes from the workings of the Holy Spirit within the convert. Sorry, but that’s al I’ve got, and your lies abotu me don;t make feel like responding. I said that you called me names, you said I was a liar, I cited an example, you ignore it. And then you call me a liar again! Go blow a bishop, I’m done with you. ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/92 "2005-03-11T19:33:30Z")
> [@Foible](#): > > If someone’s ethics come from their religion then what’s the difference? I live in Oregon where a coalition of self-righteous religious foks just got their definition of marriage written into our constitution. Their justification? The bible! > > I don’t get what your point is, are we supposed to “hate the ethics, love the dogma?” No. I’m definitely not saying that these people deserve any slack. In fact, if anything, the fact that they conceal their true motivation and hide behind religion makes them more reprehensible. But you don’t seem to understand why I say that religion _isn’t_ the true motivation, so I’ll try to explain it another way. Picture a hypothetical violent homophobe. This person might give religion as their reason for hatred, but does it add up? Do you accept that all other things being equal, this person would be tolerant if religion were removed from the equation? I don’t. Religion comes up because, consciously or unconsciously, such a person needs reasonable sounding justification for unreasonable feelings. If religion were truly the origin of such hate, it would be widespread beyond imagining. It becomes even clearer if you look at other groups that are targets of hatred - the hate looks much the same, but other justifications come up more than religion. It would be interesting if someone studied the demographics of a parish that regularly indulged in hate speech. Would the congregation consist mostly of locals who grew up in the parish, or would it consist mostly of those who left their old parish to join one more closely aligned with their feelings. I suspect it would be the latter. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/93 "2005-03-11T19:48:46Z")
> [@Waverly](#): > > If religion were truly the origin of such hate, it would be widespread beyond imagining. Read a history book. Most likely, after having done so, you would see a collection of people who used religion to justify there beliefs, while I would see the oposite. So I guess nothing would change after all. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/94 "2005-03-11T20:24:23Z")
> [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > Read a history book. Most likely, after having done so, you would see a collection of people who used religion to justify there beliefs, while I would see the oposite. So I guess nothing would change after all. 😛 Scott, welcome to the boards! Now get a clue. If religion were causing people to do these things, why not a modern crusade? A modern inquisition? A modern burning times? All of these events, and more like them, had complex and multifaceted motivations behind them. Do all of them frequently get chalked up to religion in high-school level history books? Sure. Granted. But I tend to think European armies would have sought those lands for Thor with as much enthusiasm as they did for Jesus, and the Spanish would have cracked down and seized the holdings of non-Spaniards in the name of Apollo just as readily as Yahweh. And I was talking about individual prejudices here, Scott. I wasn’t tackling global political history, but thanks for expanding the scope a bit. ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/95 "2005-03-11T20:36:25Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > I hate to break it to you, but I’ve been doing other things today than respond to you, ands you are way down on the priority list. > Want the rough draft? Here it is, minus the really inflammatory paragraphs I wrote. No, actually I was referring to your statement that you hadn’t made any “negative generalizations” about Christians. I provided evidence that that was a lie; you pretended that evidence didn’t exist. Fortunately, others saw it, and can still see it, right [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5929116&postcount=200). Oh, and that was a few days ago, my friend. > [@](#): > > Sorry, but that’s al I’ve got, and your lies abotu me don;t make feel like responding. I said that you called me names, you said I was a liar, I cited an example, you ignore it. And then you call me a liar again! Let’s get one thing straight: I never called you a “fag”. I may have called you other things, most of which are true, but “fag” wasn’t one of them. That’s such a blatant distortion of what I actually said that it’s laughable. But if you, or anyone else for that matter, actually thinks I called you a “fag”, then I urge you to report me to a mod. See how far that gets you. > [@](#): > > Go blow a bishop, I’m done with you. What are you, twelve? ---
**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:** [March 11, 2005, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/96 "2005-03-11T20:41:12Z")
> [@leander](#): > > Let’s get one thing straight: I never called you a “fag”. I may have called you other things, most of which are true, but “fag” wasn’t one of them. Okay, but where did he say you called him that? ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/97 "2005-03-11T20:42:26Z")
> [@Waverly](#): > > If religion were causing people to do these things, why not a modern crusade? A modern inquisition? A modern burning times? > I wasn’t tackling global political history, but thanks for expanding the scope a bit. Well, as long as I am expanding the scope, here are some modern examples. In the years 1942-1943 in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveliç, a practicing Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. [The Yugoslav Auschwitz and the Vatican: The Croatian Massacre of the Serbs During World War II](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0879757523/qid=1110574631/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/104-0637574-9470309?v=glance&s=books) [The Vatican and the Holocaust by Randolph L. Braham](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0880334487/qid=1110574631/sr=1-8/ref=sr_1_8/104-0637574-9470309?v=glance&s=books) Bosnia (Roman Catholics, Serbian Orthodox, Muslims) India (Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Aboriginals, etc.) Indonesia (Christians, Muslims) Middle East (Christians (to a small degree), Jews and Muslims) Northern Ireland (Protestants and Roman Catholics) Sudan (Christians, Muslims) Oh, and Viking law said, as far as I could tell, “It is a-ok to go out and kill those weaker than you.” It sounds good for justifying conquering foreign lands, but it doesn’t hold a candle to verses in the torah/old testament, which said, get bloody revenge for things that never really happened. ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/98 "2005-03-11T20:46:45Z")
> [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > Okay, but where did he say you called him that? Right [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5928275&postcount=169): > [@gobear](#): > > C. Getting to call me a fag must have felt good. Too bad I’m not black, then you could call me a nigger. That would really satisfy you. Your calling me a bigot is mere projection of your own prejudice. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/99 "2005-03-11T21:06:34Z")
Scott, Thank you so much. I can’t wait for my new books to arrive so I can see what you are talking about. I’m especially surprised that ethnicity has nothing to do with to do with the situation in Croatia, but I guess I can stifle my dismay until I get the book. Do you need my mailing address? Thanks again, this is most generous. Your pal, W. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2005, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925/100 "2005-03-11T21:13:27Z")
> [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > Well, as long as I am expanding the scope, here are some modern examples. > In the years 1942-1943 in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveliç, a practicing Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. > [The Yugoslav Auschwitz and the Vatican: The Croatian Massacre of the Serbs During World War II](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0879757523/qid=1110574631/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/104-0637574-9470309?v=glance&s=books) > [The Vatican and the Holocaust by Randolph L. Braham](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0880334487/qid=1110574631/sr=1-8/ref=sr_1_8/104-0637574-9470309?v=glance&s=books) > > Bosnia (Roman Catholics, Serbian Orthodox, Muslims) > India (Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Aboriginals, etc.) > Indonesia (Christians, Muslims) > Middle East (Christians (to a small degree), Jews and Muslims) > Northern Ireland (Protestants and Roman Catholics) > Sudan (Christians, Muslims) > > Oh, and Viking law said, as far as I could tell, “It is a-ok to go out and kill those weaker than you.” It sounds good for justifying conquering foreign lands, but it doesn’t hold a candle to verses in the torah/old testament, which said, get bloody revenge for things that never really happened. Good examples. Minor nitpick on your first one: Fram all that I’ve read, the Ustashi were a paramilitary group resembling the Blackshirts and Brownshirts with a Fascist (literally) ethnic-cleansing agenda. They were less interested in the Serbs being Orthodox than in the Orthodox being Serbs. It doesn’t detract much from your point, but suggesting it was _primarily_ religious-oriented is in error. Rather, that particular one was primarily interethnic conflict turned to institutionalized terror. However, it appears that being part of a nebulously defined religious or social group is now grounds for being condemned for the idiocies of the extremists affiliated with that group. Like **Angua** , who as a Muslim is clearly a terrorist. Or **zev** , clearly a part of the International Jewish Conspiracy. And **gobear** himself, who is clearly out to destroy the institution of marriage. I used to know the term for this sort of pigeonholing of people; can anyone help? And by the way, does anyone know where the Straight Dope Message Board that used to be at this URL went to? I vaguely remember that they were good at helping people make the sorts of distinctions that **gobear** seems to be having a problem making. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-are-no-atheists-on-this-board/293925.md?page=6)