Feed on Posts or Comments 22 December 2014

Christianity &Islam &Judaism &Rationals Thomas on 19 Apr 2012 12:35 am

What does the intolerance toward atheists in the United States look like?

What does the intolerance toward atheists in the United States look like? Two examples:

For what it’s worth, I “won.”

lost a dear friend today r/atheism. Intolerance is a bitch…

Pretty appalling, no?

86 Responses to “What does the intolerance toward atheists in the United States look like?”

  1. on 19 Apr 2012 at 2:58 pm 1.Doug Fo said …

    What can I say, “Keep America Pure” sounds awfully like Godwin territory to me.

  2. on 19 Apr 2012 at 7:13 pm 2.42YA said …

    “Pretty appalling, no?”

    No, not really. Atheist make it up in their mind they are discriminated because they are atheist. Not true. We don’t trust an atheist because they cannot be trusted. They make claims it is OK to lie, steal and cheat in the right circumstances on this blog.

    Therefore they should remain relegated to places where such practices flourish like claiming macroevolution is a fact, attacking Christians on blogs and running communist dictatorships.

  3. on 19 Apr 2012 at 7:54 pm 3.Prime said …

    42: You’re not welcome at the grown-up table if you’re going to talk like a moron.

  4. on 19 Apr 2012 at 8:07 pm 4.Doug Fo said …

    42YA, how terribly dishonest, but given that your nym is noting but dishonesty, it shouldn’t be a surprise how easily lies come to you.

    Two examples of discrimination are put in from of you, and you dismiss it as not true. That Atheists DESERVE to be discriminated against.

    So you make two mutually exclusive claims, one of which is in contradiction to the evidence in from of you. All because you want to treat Atheists badly.

    Ending with a rather old fallacy of guilt by association.

    Congratulations for being more dishonest than the average politician.

  5. on 19 Apr 2012 at 8:46 pm 5.DPK said …

    “They make claims it is OK to lie, steal and cheat in the right circumstances on this blog.”

    This cements it for me that 42yr is Horattio… this has been a common theme of his. That morality is absolute and because it comes from god, that’s good because we don’t have to think about it. Lying is always wrong… I’d hate to be the jew hiding in his basement when the SS came knocking at the door.

    Hor, it is so easy to spot your sock puppets… but don’t you think it’s dishonest to pretend to be more than one person when you’re really just a single, crazy old loon obsessed with atheists and who can’t stand the idea of anyone who doesn’t buy into your bullshit?

  6. on 19 Apr 2012 at 8:54 pm 6.Asher said …

    42

    I find it ironic atheist think they are discriminated against. Two stories, unverified and there is supposed to be a pity party? Lying is OK in the atheist world so how can we know? Could be the one lost their job (if they did) because he/she was a horrible attorney. The other simply photoshopped.

    I worked for the city with a wonderful gentleman named Al for over 20 years. Al was an atheist now he is agnostic. One of the most morally upright men I have ever known. Al is respectful of everyone which is why he is highly admired and respected. He is in no way discriminated against. You get what you give.

    Remember this:

    “The underbelly of fundamentalist Christianity and radical Islam does not operate in the legal system. They don’t respond to lawsuits, letters, amicus briefs or other grass-roots campaigns and they must, must, must be eradicated.” Al Stefanelli

    This is verified as true. Watch the atheist defend this as “out of context”.

  7. on 19 Apr 2012 at 9:32 pm 7.Prime said …

    The only thing wrong with Stefanelli’s statement there is how you’re reading it, Asher. You can eradicate fundamentalism without doing a single thing more than changing people’s minds.

    Maybe you don’t know who Al Stefanelli is, though. Former Baptist preacher, now atheist, married to a Christian with Christian children. Has he seen his fair share of discrimination as an atheist? Yes, he blogs about it frequently on freethoughtblogs.

  8. on 19 Apr 2012 at 10:40 pm 8.Lou (DFW) said …

    “6.Asher said …

    “The underbelly of fundamentalist Christianity and radical Islam does not operate in the legal system. They don’t respond to lawsuits, letters, amicus briefs or other grass-roots campaigns and they must, must, must be eradicated.” Al Stefanelli

    “This is verified as true. Watch the atheist defend this as “out of context”.

    I’m not defending it at all. So what if he said it? He isn’t representative of all atheists anymore than Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church is of all xtians – or are they?

  9. on 20 Apr 2012 at 12:12 am 9.DPK said …

    So one one hand, you know an atheist who is “the most morally upstanding man” you know. On the other, all atheists are immoral liars, cheats, and thieves. Which is it? If your atheist friend is morally upright, where does he get his morality? Hor says you cannot be moral without a belief in god. I guess maybe you agree that his is wrong about that, huh?
    And what is wrong with eradicating the underbelly of radical Islam and Christianity.? You don’t think al Qaeda should be eradicated? You’re in favor of nut job fundemantialist sects marrying 12 year olds or withholding medical treatment from sick children? You think terrorist training camps should be tolerated or encouraged?
    You are a strange one mr. Asher.

  10. on 20 Apr 2012 at 6:13 am 10.Severin said …

    2 Horatio
    “They make claims it is OK to lie, steal and cheat in the right circumstances on this blog.Therefore they should remain relegated to places where such practices flourish …”

    The sick liar/hater “strikes” again!

    World would flourish concentration camps if you had power.

    I do not hate you, and I would never agree to relegate you anywhere you don’t want to be!

    I am sorry for you, yes. Therewith, I am showing you that an atheist has much more moral strength and tolerance than you, whatever you call yourself, you miserable creature.

  11. on 20 Apr 2012 at 8:50 am 11.Lou (DFW) said …

    6.Asher said …

    “I find it ironic atheist think they are discriminated against. Two stories, unverified and there is supposed to be a pity party?”

    You mean like the story of your imaginary god, not to mention all the other unverified stories in the bible? Xtians base their entire “worldview” upon them, and an entire institution is built upon them, yet you whine about a so-called “pity party?”

    “Lying is OK in the atheist world so how can we know? Could be…”

    Hor lies when he makes that claim, then bases his lie upon “could be.” COULD BE?

    “I worked for the city…blah,blah, blah.”

    That’s nothing but an “unverified” story.

  12. on 20 Apr 2012 at 12:42 pm 12.Boz said …

    Asher,

    I think the reality is this. The majority of those who are atheist are decent people. Misguided, no doubt but decent individuals just living their lives. Unfortunately for them the underbelly of their movement are hate-filled bigots who have no respect for differing views and want to shove their worldview down the throats of all others.

    Outrageous behavior makes them money and gives them attention. We hope those who call for eradication like this Stefanelli are few but who knows.

    These bigots are the ones who lead their movement by virtue of blogs, books and broadcast media. Who could possibly like them other than other bigots.

  13. on 20 Apr 2012 at 12:43 pm 13.Boz said …

    “This cements it for me that 42yr is Horattio… this has been a common theme of his. That morality is absolute and because it comes from god”

    I guess I am Horatio too.

  14. on 20 Apr 2012 at 1:44 pm 14.Lou (DFW) said …

    12.Boz said …

    “I think the reality is this.”

    Who cares? You also believe in an imaginary god. So much for your concept of reality.

    “The majority of those who are atheist are decent people. Misguided, no doubt but decent individuals just living their lives. Unfortunately for them the underbelly of their movement are hate-filled bigots who have no respect for differing views and…”

    http://tinyurl.com/6rvxqfh

    “…want to shove their worldview down the throats of all others.”

    How many religious institutions are there whose mission is to do precisely that – shove their worldview down the throats of all others?

    Hint: all of them

  15. on 20 Apr 2012 at 2:20 pm 15.Doug Fo said …

    Boz, tolerance for different views?

    It is one thing to know your neighbor believes in magic words said over a cracker will mystically trasform it into human flesh. That’s tolerable.

    It is a different thing for us to know millions of people who believe in magic words said over a cracker will mystically trasform it into human flesh, and have other beliefs surrounding this, that use these unfounded to dictate public policy from discrimination against gays to limiting women’s rights. That’s not tolerable.

    So, stating someone has absolutely no proof of their loony ideas that they only accept because the society around them accepts those belief isn’t bigoted. We are just stating you are wrong, and stop forcing your wrong belief on us.

    So not only are you wrong about your god belief, you are wrong about those that are leaders in the atheist community.

  16. on 20 Apr 2012 at 2:43 pm 16.Boz said …

    Doug

    We agree. I don’t believe crackers transform into flesh either. Not sure why that was important to bring up. I also don’t believe lightning struck ooze and created life.

    Now, you are absolutely wrong regarding prejudice against gays. Gays were marginalized in society due to cultural stigma, not Christian policies. Gays have all the same rights as any member in the American culture. Don’t come to me with the talking points regarding gay marriage. First you are asking a culture to change the definition of a word. Meet the definition, you can get married. Second, marriage is not a right any more than owning a driving license is a right. Third it has not been banned since it never existed.

    Next, Christians have every right to dictate policy as does an atheist as long as it doesn’t violate the Constitution. Its the will of the people and atheist frankly are just whiny. Don’t read the back of your currency and you will be fine. One more correction. You don’t have a right not to be offended.

    You are wrong, and stop forcing your beliefs on me or desiring to eradicate me.

  17. on 20 Apr 2012 at 2:49 pm 17.Boz said …

    I just checked with my wife. She has all the rights a woman is suppose to have. Careers, pursuit of happiness, opportunity, freedom to worship, freedom to choose, etc.

    Now she doesn’t expect the government to pay for her contraceptives but knows she can go to the free clinic or Wal-Mart. Again, it is not a right, it is personal responsibility.

    President Obama and MSNBC has made so many of you brain dead. Do you own thinking and stop listening to the talking heads.

  18. on 20 Apr 2012 at 3:24 pm 18.Doug Fo said …

    Boz, I was just using it as one of the many cockamamie ideas that people who are Christian believe in.

    I should have come up with some of the things more universal, like that an Omnipowerful entity needs to become human and sacrifice himself to himself to avert his own wrath for his own creations doing what he knew were going to do in the first place because they didn’t measure up to his standards.

    “Don’t come to me with the talking points”
    “I just checked with my wife. She has all the rights a woman is suppose to have”

    Ahh avoiding all the responsibility of backing up your position and whining that it isn’t fair you actually bring up points I am incapable of dealing with because I want to have everything defined by my own superstitions

  19. on 20 Apr 2012 at 3:25 pm 19.Lou (DFW) said …

    17.Boz said …

    “President Obama and MSNBC has made so many of you brain dead. Do you own thinking and stop listening to the talking heads.”

    You really don’t have much to offer in the way of intelligent rebuttal, do you?

    Right we’re all “brain dead.” Not people who base their “worldview” upon myths, superstitions, and outright lies drummed into their heads since they were children, and based upon where they were, by chance, born. No, it’s people who watch MSNBC, not CBN, FOX, CNN, etc., etc., etc. who are “brain dead. It’s NOT the people who listen to Bush, Perry, Palin, Santorum, Bachman, etc., etc., etc. who are brain dead.

    Yes, stop listening to “talking heads.” Start by ignoring that guy at the pulpit who for some reason needs your money, wife, and children.

  20. on 20 Apr 2012 at 3:28 pm 20.Prime said …

    16.Boz said …

    “We agree. I don’t believe crackers transform into flesh either. Not sure why that was important to bring up. I also don’t believe lightning struck ooze and created life.”

    I’m only quoting this part because the rest of it is all a bunch of hate-filled rhetoric that doesn’t deserve the attention you seem to think it does. You don’t understand the word equality, though, quite clearly, and your religious beliefs are to blame.

    Now, for the part I quoted… actually, you’re a member of pretty much the only group that believes that lightning struck ooze and created life. Look at your wording: “created life.” That’s not what happened, and “God said it, and it was so” is metaphorically no different from the apocryphal lightning bolt you’re referencing. You’ve exposed how your creationist stance blocks you from approaching and understanding science, so you’re really disqualified from talking about it because you’re nothing more than ignorant on the matter.

    No reputable scientist in the world thinks that’s how life started. Gradual changes in organic compounds in a variety of circumstances (few, if any, of which involved lightning except in the very first stage). This took place over what was probably millions or tens of millions of years. Simple organic compounds are common throughout the solar system *without God having to have created life on every comet and moon and planet except Mercury.* Scientists are already discovering how various crystals of organic compounds respond to “selection pressures” that enable them to grow their crystal lattices more effectively. Push that a few million years, and you very well could have some simple molecules that enhance the growth process by being able to roughly replicate themselves. At that point, the wheels are in motion, life happens, and evolution gets you from there to here, where you can use the products of 4 billion years of evolution to futilely deny that it happened 150 years after the scientific community figured it out and placed it beyond the doubt of any educated person in the world.

    You shame yourself by running your mouth like you do.

  21. on 20 Apr 2012 at 3:44 pm 21.Jay said …

    I just checked with my wife. She has all the rights a woman is suppose to have. Careers, pursuit of happiness, opportunity, freedom to worship, freedom to choose, etc.

    I was raised in the Wisconsin Lutheran Synod, but gave up church a long time ago. To this day the women in the congregation are not allowed to become pastors or allowed to become voting members or sit on the church board. So, I guess woman can’t do anything they want.

  22. on 20 Apr 2012 at 4:45 pm 22.Doug Fo said …

    Lets just look at some of the arguments against suffrage:
    ————————————————-
    The practical tendency of women’s suffrage, as all must see, is to impair the unity of the family as a social organism, being itself a denial of it, and to create discord and rivalries between husband and wife, who by the divine ordinance are “no more twain but one flesh,” but by this act are legally declared to be not one but two.

    ————————————————–
    The cry of “woman’s rights,” so shrilly and persistently sounded in our ears, needs to be weighed and analyzed more carefully than it is wont to be by those who raise and listen to it. No human being has any natural rights beyond what nature bestows, nor any political rights except what political expediency and the best interests of society prescribe. Natural rights are grounded in the nature which God has given us, and are the claims which that nature asserts in the name of God for fulfilling its true end.
    ————————————————–
    This whole movement for female suffrage, is, at least in its motive and beginning, a rebellion against the divinely ordained position and duties of woman, and an ambition for independence and the honors of a more public life
    _________________________________________________

    The mothers of this country can shape the destinies of the nation by keeping in their places and attending to those duties that God Almighty intended for them.
    _________________________________________________

    In fact it is hard to find an argument against the rights of women to vote that doesn’t use religion as part of their reasoning. That is the force of religion and why it has been a force against womens rights

  23. on 20 Apr 2012 at 5:05 pm 23.DPK said …

    I’m glad to hear that Boz at least doesn’t share the lunacy of his Roman Catholic peers who DO believe the bread is magically transformed into the body of Jesus… funny how everyone ELSE’S religious beliefs are bullshit, except yours.
    I know a local family who’s women are not allowed out of the house without a man to accompany them, then are not permitted to drive a car, nor can they show their face uncovered in public. This is for religious reasons. IF they had their way, NO women would be allowed to do any of those things.
    I remember from catholic school, nuns were required to take a vow of poverty, but my parish priest drove a Cadillac, wore Italian leather loafers and drank Chevas.

    Boz… “I also don’t believe lightning struck ooze and created life.”
    But you believe an invisible man breathed into mud and created a human, then took a rib from him and made a woman, then put them in a magic garden with a talking snake. Well, so much for what you believe in.

    “Now, you are absolutely wrong regarding prejudice against gays. Gays were marginalized in society due to cultural stigma, not Christian policies.”
    On what do you suppose these “cultural stigmas” are based on? Do children naturally know to be prejudiced against gays, or is that taught them because the bible says it’s a sin?

    “Gays have all the same rights as any member in the American culture.”
    This should be preserved here as the stupidest and most blatant lie you have ever told.

    “Don’t come to me with the talking points regarding gay marriage.”
    Presumably because you don’t have a defense for it. A church elder wants to marry a 12 year old and that’s “religious freedom” but 2 committed adults who want to marry can’t because it doesn’t fit YOUR definition? Is the “right” to free speech also subject to popular vote?

    “Its the will of the people and atheist frankly are just whiny. Don’t read the back of your currency and you will be fine. One more correction. You don’t have a right not to be offended.”

    Jim Crowe laws were also “the will of the people.” Why don’t you just say what you really mean… “Shut up and take your seat in the back of the bus and stop trying to be so uppity. You have your own water fountain, you don’t need ours…. nobody likes a whiny, big mouthed n%^^&$ ! That’s what you really mean, isn’t it Boz?

    You are wrong, and stop forcing your beliefs on me or desiring to eradicate me.
    Paranoid now, aren’t we? Tell us who you think is forcing their beliefs on you and trying to eradicate you? Near as I can tell, no one dragged you here… and has there been an attempt on your life? You needn’t worry… only religious people kill people over religion.

  24. on 20 Apr 2012 at 5:36 pm 24.Prime said …

    23.DPK said
    “…” <–for brevity

  25. on 20 Apr 2012 at 5:37 pm 25.Prime said …

    I don’t know what just happened there, but I had some more stuff:
    “Stands up; claps”

  26. on 20 Apr 2012 at 5:39 pm 26.Doug Fo said …

    Lou said:
    Yes, stop listening to “talking heads.” Start by ignoring that guy at the pulpit who for some reason needs your money, wife, and children

    I’ll give you a hint Boz, he’s the one saying:

    “An Omnipowful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing how made them that they weren’t going to live up to his standards.

    And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.”

  27. on 20 Apr 2012 at 5:40 pm 27.A said …

    @Boz “Next, Christians have every right to dictate policy as does an atheist as long as it doesn’t violate the Constitution. Its the will of the people and atheist frankly are just whiny.”

    And then the atheist go on to whine with hate-filled retorts. Not worth entertaining.

    Of course atheist have the same rights as all Americans. The few loud lobbyist would have you believe they don’t. Their job depends on it.

    Woman have all the same rights as men. Silly examples of private groups who limit woman are not examples of rights violated. I’m a guy and I cannot join Curves. The despair!

    The hate-filled atheist would like to silence all religions and if they could they would do it with force. They tell us to keep it to ourselves although the Constitution protects our right to speak. They wish to lock up parents who teach their children about God. What a dangerous group of angry bitter malcontents.

  28. on 20 Apr 2012 at 5:47 pm 28.B+ said …

    January 10, 1878

    U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919. Republicans foil Democratic efforts to keep women in the kitchen, where they belong

  29. on 20 Apr 2012 at 5:55 pm 29.Prime said …

    Oh, look… B+ (who like 42 stole my creative naming convention for the forum and turned it into a sad hack) has fallen for the ‘”republicans” and “democrats” haven’t always represented the same ideologies throughout history’ trick. Next thing you know, he’ll talk about how the Democrats made up the KKK, like it matters.

    What actually brought up and represented both of those positions, you question-dodging, disingenuous simpleton, is religiously based conservatism, which was the democrat position before the big switch on all of that post-WWII, when those terms actually got their first real definition and partisan affiliation.

    In other words, thanks for making our point for us. Religion teaches people to hate women, gays, minorities, and anyone that thinks differently from themselves.

  30. on 20 Apr 2012 at 6:37 pm 30.Doug Fo said …

    Yes B+, the Democrats and the Republicans more or less switched as forces for progress and regress. Your point is???? Well, your point is to lie by omission, but Prime already called you on that, but it is so eggregious that I wanted to point it out again.

  31. on 20 Apr 2012 at 7:16 pm 31.B+ said …

    “the democrat position before the big switch on all of that post-WWII, when those terms actually got their first real definition and partisan affiliation.”

    June 10, 1964

    Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.

    February 19, 1976

    President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

  32. on 20 Apr 2012 at 7:47 pm 32.Lou (DFW) said …

    17.Boz said …

    “I just checked with my wife. She has all the rights a woman is suppose to have. Careers, pursuit of happiness, opportunity, freedom to worship, freedom to choose, etc. ”

    BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT NOW REQUIRES THAT! If it wasn’t for the government, or if it really was xtian based as you would have us believe, women would not have anywhere near the rights that they have now.

    Sheese! How damn dense can you be?!

  33. on 20 Apr 2012 at 7:50 pm 33.Lou (DFW) said …

    16.Boz said …

    “Don’t read the back of your currency [where it's printed IN GOD WE TRUST] and you will be fine.”

    Then, incredibly he wrote:

    “You are wrong, and stop forcing your beliefs on me…”

    “…or desiring to eradicate me.”

    Not you, your religion.

  34. on 20 Apr 2012 at 7:57 pm 34.Lou (DFW) said …

    2.42YA said …

    “They [atheists] make claims it is OK to lie, steal and cheat in the right circumstances on this blog.”

    OK all you atheists, stop lying, stealing, and cheating on this blog!

    Actually, it’s xtians and other theists who endorse the most hypocritical double-standard there is. It’s OK for them to have abortions when they want – rape, incest, mother’s life, but when anybody else wants it, it’s a different story.

  35. on 20 Apr 2012 at 8:33 pm 35.Prime said …

    31.B+ said …

    “June 10, 1964
    February 19, 1976″

    Yup. Post-WWII. Like I said. FFS.

  36. on 20 Apr 2012 at 8:36 pm 36.Prime said …

    The whole point, B+, was that your attack on “democrats” above was actually an attack on religious-based social conservatism, which you espouse and attempt to defend.

    Nice work there.

  37. on 20 Apr 2012 at 9:16 pm 37.Lou (DFW) said …

    Republican Presidential nominee Barry Goldwater, aka Mr. Conservative, actually opposed the religious right. Even he knew that they are too extreme.

  38. on 21 Apr 2012 at 4:33 pm 38.DPK said …

    “The whole point, B+, was that your attack on “democrats” above was actually an attack on religious-based social conservatism, which you espouse and attempt to defend.”

    Yup, they are so blinded by the dogmatic bile they are programed to spew out they don’t even realize when they are making the opponent’s case for them!

    So, just so I understand now… Democrats suck and Republicans are good, therefore gods really exist? Or is it Republicans suck and Democrats are good, therefore gods really exist?

    I’m sorry, their endless diversionary tactics and constant circular reasoning just makes my head spin. How about you just give it to us straight… you believe in invisible, non-physical, non temporal, all good, all loving, prayer answering, law giving, sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself, all powerful, all knowing, and eternal god-beings because?????
    Anyone?

  39. on 21 Apr 2012 at 6:26 pm 39.Biff said …

    “the democrat position before the big switch on all of that post-WWII, when those terms actually got their first real definition and partisan affiliation.”

    B+ summed it up well. Democrats devour their young. They use race as a means to an end. They don’t care about minorities unless they are registered with their party. Let them dare transgress and they will be called an Uncle Tom. Just ask Herman Cain and Allen West.

    Let a woman dare transgress and she will be called every vile name in the book and never receive a call from the President to see if she is OK.

  40. on 21 Apr 2012 at 7:44 pm 40.DPK said …

    Let a woman dare transgress and she will be called every vile name in the book and never receive a call from the President to see if she is OK.

    Ok, and that shows your imaginary god is real, because?

  41. on 22 Apr 2012 at 12:55 am 41.Ted said …

    I can share with you quickly why atheist are not trusted or respected. Atheists are very quick to blame religion for someone who uses “God” to commit and evil act. They would never consider maybe the individual is deranged, an opportunist or just using “God” for personal gain.

    Then, consider the Stalins, the Lenins and Pol Pots of the world. The Atheists who kill those who will not renounce their beliefs in God. In the Atheist mind, this has nothing to do with their Atheist beliefs although removing religion from society lead to their dastardly deeds. They accept zero criticism of the Atheist worldview showing they are very child-like and quite untrustworthy.

    Naturally not all are this myopic but most on websites fir this profile.

  42. on 22 Apr 2012 at 1:07 am 42.alex said …

    “I can share with you quickly why atheist are not trusted or respected.”

    atheists are evil, blah, blah, blah.
    hitler, polpot, blah, blah, blah.
    diversions, lookey here, blah, blah.

    the shit ain’t gonna work. where is your god proof?

  43. on 22 Apr 2012 at 3:17 pm 43.DPK said …

    Ted.
    I can share with you quickly why religious people are not trusted or respected by those who think rationally. Theists are very quick to blame atheists for someone who uses “atheism” to commit and [sic] evil act. They would never consider maybe the individual is deranged, an opportunist or just using “ atheism” for personal gain.
    Then, consider the various religions of the world, who have historically, and still do, kill and oppress those who will not accept their beliefs in God. In the religious mind, this is because they think this is what their god commands them to do. “Saving” people, and spreading their religion to everyone leads to their dastardly deeds. They accept zero criticism of their deluded worldview, and demand respect and tolerance showing they are very child-like and quite untrustworthy.

    Naturally not all are this myopic but most on websites fir [sic] this profile.

  44. on 22 Apr 2012 at 4:19 pm 44.Lou (DFW) said …

    39.Biff said …

    “Democrats devour their young.”

    But Republican xtians don’t?

    http://tinyurl.com/7wlwdgy

    “Just ask Herman Cain and Allen West.

    Let a woman dare transgress and she will be called every vile name in the book and never receive a call from the President to see if she is OK.”

    I wonder if Cain received a call from President Obama to see if he “is OK” after being accused of committing so many acts of sexual harassment of women?

  45. on 22 Apr 2012 at 4:32 pm 45.Lou (DFW) said …

    41.Ted said …

    “They would never consider maybe the individual is deranged, an opportunist or just using “God” for personal gain.”

    Do you mean like so many xtian televangelists, mega-church preachers, and child-molesting priests?

    “In the Atheist mind, this has nothing to do with their Atheist beliefs although removing religion from society lead to their dastardly deeds. They accept zero criticism of the Atheist worldview showing they are very child-like and quite untrustworthy.”

    Here we go again, in order to minimize the craziness of their religion, he refers to “Atheist [sic] beliefs” and “Atheist [sic] worldview” as if being an atheist is a religion. It isn’t. Not believing in your religion isn’t a belief or a worldview anymore than not believing in Santa Claus is. But like your religion, belief in Santa Claus is “very child-like and quite untrustworthy.”

    Not believing in crazy stuff isn’t the same as believing it, nor is it a “worldview.” Stop trying to make “atheism” the opposite of the same coin that religion is on. It isn’t. To continue to lie about atheists only demonstrates the desperation of your belief that requires you to be dishonest in the face absolutely no evidence for your imaginary god.

  46. on 22 Apr 2012 at 4:33 pm 46.Lou (DFW) said …

    45.Lou (DFW) said …

    Correction: Stop trying to make “atheism” the opposite side of the same coin that religion is on.

  47. on 22 Apr 2012 at 5:28 pm 47.A said …

    Ted,

    You summed it up perfectly.

  48. on 22 Apr 2012 at 6:00 pm 48.Lou (DFW) said …

    47.A said …

    “Ted,

    You summed it up perfectly.”

    A, you suck-up perfectly.

    Seriously, do you actual think that your inconsequential compliment actually adds any legitimacy to “Ted’s” nonsensical comments?

    Hor, why do you feel the need to reinforce your sock-puppet Ted comments with another sock-puppet A?

  49. on 23 Apr 2012 at 12:32 pm 49.Doug Fo said …

    You are trying do the very old and very refuted “Atheism! Stalin! Genocide!” argument.

    A classic…”hey look over there” red herring argument. These regimes did have an expressed lack of belief in the judeo-Christian God, they also had a lack of belief in Zeus. Should we then try to associate their lack of belief in Zeus with the situation with a lack of freedom and human rights under such regimes?

    Which lead us to what do atrocities come from? An unquestionable autocracy, nearly every damn time. The easiest way to produce one of those is to say the rules come from divinity.

  50. on 23 Apr 2012 at 1:12 pm 50.Anonymous said …

    “Hor, why do you feel the need to reinforce your sock-puppet Ted comments with another sock-puppet A?”

    For the same reason he feels the need to reinforce his sock-puppet Asher’s comment with his sock puppet Boz?

  51. on 23 Apr 2012 at 5:33 pm 51.DPK said …

    “With or without religion,
    you would have good people doing good things
    and evil people doing evil things.
    But for good people to do evil things,
    that takes religion.”

  52. on 23 Apr 2012 at 7:06 pm 52.MegaByte said …

    “Should we then try to associate their lack of belief in Zeus with the situation with a lack of freedom and human rights under such regimes?”

    No, we should just reinforce the argument that they were atheists hell bent on removing the evil religion from society. Sounds familiar.

    All it takes is militant atheists convinced that removing religion is for the good of mankind. Then if they can obtain power they can begin the genocide of the religious. The newer generations always convince themselves they can bring utopia.

  53. on 23 Apr 2012 at 7:47 pm 53.Doug Fo said …

    So Megabyte, still trying the misdirection, mis definition, and guilt by association game I see.

    These regimes were built on anti-rational doctrines. They held these doctrines above evidence, they had holy texts and when geographic isolation led to different interpretation of these texts, they held the other interpretation in contempt.

    The problem doesn’t come from their difference from religion…the problem comes from their similarity to religion.

  54. on 23 Apr 2012 at 7:54 pm 54.Severin said …

    52 MB
    ” Then if they can obtain power they can begin the genocide of the religious.”

    Like, for example, in France?
    We can see that from about 100 years ago, when there was no atheists in France, to today, with 30% atheists, France became a fascist country with concentration camps for Christians all over the country.
    You ARE an idiot!

  55. on 23 Apr 2012 at 7:57 pm 55.Lou(DFW) said …

    52.MegaByte said …

    “All it takes is militant atheists convinced that removing religion is for the good of mankind. Then if they can obtain power they can begin the genocide of the religious. The newer generations always convince themselves they can bring utopia.”

    Why is it that you always reply with nonsense to this topic, morality, Big Bang, and evolution, but you NEVER, EVER reply with evidence for your imaginary god?

    How many 100,000s of people were murdered and tortured by Saddam Hussein? He wasn’t an atheist. He considered himself to be a holy man. And we all know that he was because the Islamic holy book, the Qur’an, written in his blood to give thanks to God.

  56. on 23 Apr 2012 at 8:22 pm 56.Prime said …

    52.MegaByte said …

    “All it takes is militant atheists convinced that removing religion is for the good of mankind. Then if they can obtain power they can begin the genocide of the religious. The newer generations always convince themselves they can bring utopia.”

    Wait, let me get this straight. Since most of the modern world’s governments are secular, what you’re trying to argue here is that to prevent genocide it is required that the world is governed by religious people who believe in promoting secularism?

  57. on 23 Apr 2012 at 9:04 pm 57.DPK said …

    But the ridiculous thing is, even IF all the lies MegaHor makes about atheists and secular people were true… that STILL wouldn’t make his imaginary god real… reality is that which is, whether you believe it or not.
    And I love the way they lay blame on the godless atheists for mankind’s evils, when it was the churches who presided over the Dark Ages, the Crusades, the Inquisition, and 100′s of other “holy wars”.

  58. on 23 Apr 2012 at 9:06 pm 58.Doug Fo said …

    Funny when I pointed out a red herring and guilt by association fallacy, and Megabyte just continued with a red herring guilt by association fallacy but putting a bit of strawman spin on it.

    So far in my life, every time a theist puts forward an argument, it will contain at least fallacy but generally more.

  59. on 23 Apr 2012 at 10:44 pm 59.40 year Atheist said …

    Many Atheistic arguments revolve around the malfeasance of various religious denominations, sects, hierarchies or evangelists. Because there is such malfeasance in the name of religion, there must be no deity, the thinking seems to go. There is a rebellion against ecclesiatical behavior and the people and organizations that behave this way.

    But the rebellion is couched in moral terms, based on underlying moral principles that are felt to be the principles that the ecclesiast transgressors have betrayed, principles that are valid and moral and important according to the rebel. The rebel holds the ecclesiasts to their own underlying principles, principles betrayed, as if those principles were his own.

    Yet the rebel, in the final analysis, does not hold to all these principles either. The rebel rejects the basis for absolutism, and outwardly rejects absolutes as a category, paradoxically holding this rejection as an absolute. But for most rebels there is a bedrock of moral considerations that is purloined from the ecclesiast’s absolutes, even while denying their existence as absolutes, as well as the source, and claiming them as his own derivation.

    One of the historical figures most vehemently involved in the war on ecclesiastics was Voltaire. Voltaire lived through and helped create one of the most turbulent passages in western history, the French Revolution.

    France was, indeed, in the thrall of a symbiotic tyranny of monarchy cum ecclesiasts. Voltaire committed himself to the intellectual war against, primarily, the ecclesiasts. Yet, unlike Rousseau and the Encyclopedists, Voltaire never lost his connection with the First Cause, despite the physical and intellectual turmoil, and peer pressure from the radical “intellectuals”.

    Robespierre, who led the Committee of Public Safety which created and directed the Reign of Terror which, in turn, bloodied France from end to end, slept at night with Rousseau’s book under his pillow. He would have done better to have listened to Voltaire. The murderous Reign of Terror was created and perpetrated by Atheists, based on a perceived need, a need which justified any means – a Consequentialist ethic. The need was to bring about the “Republic of Virtue”, which was threatened by civil war; the solution was to kill the opposition [a solution openly endorsed decades later by Lenin].

    Voltaire, who fought against the tyranny of the ecclesiasts, decried the barbary brought about by Rousseau’s philosophy. He remained a theist, and for that obtained Rousseau’s hatred.

    Voltaire:
    “The theist is a man firmly persuaded of the existence of a supreme being as good as he is powerful, who has formed all things…; who punishes, without cruelty, all crimes, and recompenses with goodness all virtuous actions… Reunited in this principle with the rest of the universe, he does not join any of the sects which all contradict one another. His religion is the most ancient and the most widespread; for the simple worship of a God preceded all the systems of the world. He speaks a language which all peoples understand while they do not understand one another. He has brothers from Pekin to Cayenne, and he counts all the sages for his fellows. He believes that religion consists neither in the opinions of an unintelligible metaphysic, not in vain shows, but in worship and in justice. To do good is his worship, to submit to God is his creed. The Mohammedan cries out to him, “Beware if you fail to make the pilgrimage to Mecca!” – The priest says to him, “Curses on you if you do not make the trip to Notre Dame de Lorette!” He laughs at Lorette and Mecca: but he succors the indigent and defends the oppressed.” Voltaire; Correspondence, Sept 11, 1738; The Story of Philosophy; Will Durant; p 184.

    Voltaire drew up his own dying statement, after rejecting one cleric and being rejected by another, both Catholic:

    “I die adoring God, loving my friends, not hating my enemies, and detesting superstition. (signed) Voltaire. February 28, 1778”. Voltaire; Tallentyre, 538; from The Story of Philosophy; Will Durant; p 190.

    For Voltaire, the presumption – and fact – of ecclesiastic evil did not dissuade him from a persuasion of theism. And even for Rousseau Atheism was not a reaction to Ecclesiastic evil; for Rousseau all institutions were rejected in favor of a return to the nobility of savagery.

  60. on 23 Apr 2012 at 10:55 pm 60.alex said …

    59.40 year Atheist said …

    plonk…

  61. on 24 Apr 2012 at 12:11 am 61.ReligionIsStupid said …

    Alex said “plonk”. Best. Advice. Ever.

  62. on 24 Apr 2012 at 4:20 am 62.Prime said …

    Voltaire! Like the Voltaire that wrote Candide and “Curse the wretch. In 20 years, Christianity will be no more. My single hand will destroy the edifice it took 12 apostles to rear.”?

    The Interwebs confirm that it is the same Voltaire, as a matter of fact, and they confirm also that you’re a lying apologist, Stan (no surprise). Voltaire was a deist, not a theist, and he was rabidly anti-Christian. That whole “detesting superstition” thing applies to Christianity. It’s simply stunning that now Christians will recruit him to their cause. How desperate are you that even your philosophers have to play these games now, theists?

    Plonk? Yes, plonk. Like the sound of a stone falling into the middle of a pond quite distant from where anyone will ever pay it the least bit of attention.

  63. on 24 Apr 2012 at 4:34 am 63.DPK said …

    “Many Atheistic arguments revolve around the malfeasance of various religious denominations, sects, hierarchies or evangelists.”

    Except they don’t. As usual, Stan starts with a completely false or erroneous statement and then tries to build a house of cards around it. And he will NEVER defend or discuss his cut and paste “responses”… watch.

    No “atheistic arguments” comes from the misdeeds of the religious… that is simply criticism and observation of the hypocrisy that is present. It is not an “argument” that because a religious leader or apologist is an ass, therefore god does not exist, anymore that saying that because Stalin was an atheist and a mass murderer, therefore atheism is false and then gods must exist.

    Just another load of horseshit from our resident wacko Stanley that deserves nothing more in the way of response than an amused chuckle.

  64. on 24 Apr 2012 at 6:15 am 64.Severin said …

    52 MB
    Can you, or anyone, imagine bigger genocide than the big flood?
    I guess not.
    And who did it? Atheists?

    Your god gave a good example to his followers how to spread love around.

  65. on 24 Apr 2012 at 10:54 am 65.A said …

    40YA

    Votaire indeed – his quote

    “What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason.”

    A man who resisted the intolerance of the atheist left and followed the evidence to its logical conclusion.

  66. on 24 Apr 2012 at 11:00 am 66.A said …

    Dime claims Voltaire was deist while 40YA provides a quote penned by Voltaire that he was a theist.

    Who to believe?

    Dime is a rabid atheist masquerading as multiple posters while 40YA is a man of obvious reason. Lets see – Hmmmm

    Prime you are @plunked@

  67. on 24 Apr 2012 at 12:07 pm 67.Lou(DFW) said …

    66.A said …

    “Dime claims Voltaire was deist while 40YA provides a quote penned by Voltaire that he was a theist.

    Who to believe?”

    Do your own research and you will learn that there is evidence for both sides. In the end, it really doesn’t matter. The ONLY thing that matters is that the the liars 40YA and his fluffer A NEVER, EVER provide evidence for their imaginary god. All they do is provide irrelevant, illogical, name-dropping, dishonest rants that contain lies about atheists. Why? Because that’s all they have to offer.

    But if theists are allowed to quote famous philosophers as if it somehow legitimizes their delusion and lies, then here’s a quote that succinctly defines what 40YA does here:

    “The method of ‘postulating’ what we want has many advantages; they are the same as the advantages of theft over honest toil.” – Bertrand Russell

  68. on 24 Apr 2012 at 12:18 pm 68.Doug Fo said …

    Atheists: Well there’s no evidence for God

    Theists: “Atheism! Stalin! Genocide! Morality only comes from religion!”

    Atheists: “We could easily point out how relgions act to the contrary”

    Theists; “All Atheist arguments revolve around the malfeasance of various religious denominations, sects, hierarchies or evangelists”

    And you wonder why the cry “liar” and “Intellectual Dishonesty” come out so often against theists…when the theists are that baldfaced and scumbags about it?

  69. on 24 Apr 2012 at 3:06 pm 69.Prime said …

    64.Severin said …

    “52 MB
    Can you, or anyone, imagine bigger genocide than the big flood?
    I guess not.
    And who did it? Atheists?”

    Severin. Seriously. Obama did it.

  70. on 24 Apr 2012 at 3:39 pm 70.Doug Fo said …

    For everyone to be clear; Deism is theism, Agnostic theism. A theism that is only guilty of an appeal to ignorance, and none of the myriad of other intellectual failings, causes of villany, and hypocracies that Gnostic theism is guilty of.

    Overall I like Deists. As far as I have seen, no Deist has used his Deism as a reason for hampering scientific discovery, an excuse for harm, or a foundation for crippling human rights. Those faults can be found every page of history written by Gnostic theists.

  71. on 24 Apr 2012 at 5:46 pm 71.Dez said …

    “vehemently involved in the war on ecclesiastics was Voltaire. Voltaire lived through and helped create one of the most turbulent passages in western history, the French Revolution.”

    Voltaire despised ecclesiastism but he did realize that the logic of first principles meant God did exist. That led to him being despised by the atheist revolutionist since he would not sign on with their dogma.

    Theist or Deist is really irrelevant. Seems he moved to Theism as he got older and wiser. He had enough sense to know God existed and that just pissed off the atheist reactionaries.

    Thanks for dropping that gem 40ya.

  72. on 24 Apr 2012 at 6:46 pm 72.Lou (DFW) said …

    71.Dez said …

    “Theist or Deist is really irrelevant.”

    Yes, it is – just as are all the theists’ diversionary tangents posted on this blog that NEVER, EVER provide evidence for their imaginary god.

    “Thanks for dropping that gem 40ya.”

    Says Dez, another 40YA fluffer from whom 40YA seeks attention and flattery.

  73. on 24 Apr 2012 at 8:48 pm 73.Prime said …

    70.Doug Fo said …

    “For everyone to be clear; Deism is theism, Agnostic theism. A theism that is only guilty of an appeal to ignorance, and none of the myriad of other intellectual failings, causes of villany, and hypocracies that Gnostic theism is guilty of.”

    I’m not completely sure this is accurate, and the “real” theists out there spent all but maybe the last 40 years vilifying deists for the most part for that reason. Theism, if I’m not mistaken in my understanding of the word, indicates a belief in a god that is fundamentally different in character (usu. a “personal” god) than the utterly and permanently removed deist god. Then again, this is neither here nor there. That theists are recruiting deists to their cause now is evidence that they know their ship is breaking up on the rocks of logic and reasoning.

    As to it being irrelevant, I guess that really depends on you understanding of the words, per the discussion above. If you really think deism is a form of theism, it is irrelevant. If you do not, then for the reason outlined in my last sentence above, the distinction is quite important. That, in fact, is why I brought it up: to deride 40YA for lying about a situation to further his own agenda yet again.

    Now, as to it being another diversion, that’s certainly true. It doesn’t add a shred of evidence for God if every person believed in any characterization of him, even if it was completely uniform. It also doesn’t justify intolerance against atheists (would the proved existence of a God even justify that?). But that’s 40YA for you: utterly full of it.

  74. on 24 Apr 2012 at 11:25 pm 74.Lou said …

    “No “atheistic arguments” comes from the misdeeds of the religious… that is simply criticism and observation of the hypocrisy that is present.”

    40 Year I would have to actually agree with the poster on this one. Atheists have no argument for their belief. They criticize, they deride and they purposely misrepresent but they have no argument. They have gone to the cowardly “lack of belief” in order to take a stand for nothing. I laugh every time I read this new position of no position.

    40 Year and since you actually postulate a quote from Voltare as a theist, that would seem to trump all they other opinions. I read one philosopher argue that Voltaire used theist but meant deist. I take the position the man was smart enough to know who he was.

  75. on 25 Apr 2012 at 12:12 am 75.DPK said …

    40 Year I would have to actually agree with the poster on this one. Atheists have no argument for their belief. They criticize, they deride and they purposely misrepresent but they have no argument.

    You almost have it ther LouPrime. You are right that lack of belief is not a belief, it does not need an “argument” any more than not believing in flying elephants requires an argument. Now, since that seems to have finally dawned on you, perhaps you can present some evidence or a compelling argument for the claim you make. That is, that supernatural gods exist and interact with humans, or whatever it is that you claim your particular god is, or does.

    So, are you gonna put up, or just keep yapping like an annoying dog?

  76. on 25 Apr 2012 at 3:53 am 76.Prime said …

    75.DPK said …

    “You almost have it ther LouPrime.”

    Whoa! HOLY PANTS!

    What did I say to get conflated with one of the theists? I blaspheme against the Holy Spirit according to Mark 3:29 all the time.

  77. on 25 Apr 2012 at 4:28 am 77.DPK said …

    My bad prime. Poor choice of mockery. I meant Lou(prime) as in not Lou(DWF).
    Sorry about that. I don’t mean to equate you with MegaHorBenDezBozo.

  78. on 25 Apr 2012 at 10:16 am 78.Anonymous said …

    LouPrime=MegaHorBenDezBozoBiff42YATedB+AsherA

  79. on 25 Apr 2012 at 3:45 pm 79.DPK said …

    Theists are so convoluted on this topic of theism vs deism. On the one hand they want to embrace the deists as at least giving some quarter to their delusions that there is a magical god being that created what we call the universe. Most deists simply use the term “god” in this context to describe something… a law, a process… whatever, that is not understood. I myself have often said if you want to call the fundamental laws that govern the physical operation of the universe “god”… I’m fine with that.
    But deism does not allow for a god that demands worship, answers prayers, performs miracles, mass murders people, provides morality, and offers eternal life in a non physical utopia… IF you are good and believe in him. So at that point they reject them.
    As usual, they are desperately seeking validation and will try to garnish it in any small measures they can muster. Even if it means also deluding themselves into thinking that deism is some form of theism, when in reality the two are completely different animals.

  80. on 25 Apr 2012 at 5:58 pm 80.Prime said …

    77.DPK said …

    “My bad prime. Poor choice of mockery. I meant Lou(prime) as in not Lou(DWF).
    Sorry about that. I don’t mean to equate you with MegaHorBenDezBozo.”

    That works. My prime is about numbers… and Optimus.

  81. on 29 Apr 2012 at 5:15 pm 81.John said …

    America should be an open market of theistic and atheistic religions. Snobbery to snuff out either should not be tolerated.

  82. on 30 Apr 2012 at 3:14 am 82.Lou (DFW) said …

    81.John said …

    “America should be an open market of theistic and atheistic religions. Snobbery to snuff out either should not be tolerated.”

    In other words, as long as we xtians get our religious slogans plastered on public buildings and money, and our rituals and displays are allowed to be forced upon the public and the government, and as long as churches are subsidized by the government…

    BTW – there’s no such thing as “atheistic religions.” You don’t get to label the rejection of (your) religion a religion in order to somehow level the playing field with atheists. Your religion and your belief in whatever imaginary god that you believe in gets the same label as all the other religions that came before and since xtianity that YOU reject.

    As I previously wrote – you ARE on the same boat as Cameron, and with everybody who believed in ZEUS, CHALCHIHUITLCUE, AGLOOLIK, AWONAWILONA, GLUSKAP, KUNIUMI, ALLAH, GANESHA, etc., etc., etc. Yeah, you ARE on that boat. Athesits ARE NOT on that boat.

  83. on 30 Apr 2012 at 3:20 am 83.Lou (DFW) said …

    81.John said …

    “America should be an open market of theistic and atheistic religions. Snobbery to snuff out either should not be tolerated.”

    If atheists wanted to “snuff out” religion, then it’s called “snobbery.”

    When xtians want to spread xtianity to replace all other religions it’s called evangelization and conversion.

  84. on 02 May 2012 at 3:01 pm 84.Anonymous said …

    Being an atheist is causing a good man to fight for custody of his daughter

  85. on 02 May 2012 at 6:19 pm 85.sid said …

    Voltaire famously proclaimed that the Bible would be gone in 100 years and now his home to the French Bible Society.

    God has a sense of humor.

  86. on 02 May 2012 at 6:26 pm 86.DPK said …

    Paul proclaimed that Jesus would return very soon, and even Jesus supposedly said he would return within the lifetimes of many of those present… so yeah, I guess god does have a sense of humor.. either that or he has a propensity to lie.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply